Sexually transmitted diseases · 2008
Detection of human papillomavirus genotypes among high-risk women: a comparison of hybrid capture and linear array tests.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Monsonego Joseph, Pollini Giuseppe, Evrard Marie José, Sednaoui Patrice, Monfort Laura, Zerat Laurent, Syrjänen Kari
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess the concordance and performance of 2 different assays in detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes among women with abnormal Pap smear.
STUDY DESIGN: A series of 575 women referred for colposcopy due to an abnormal Pap smear were analyzed with the Linear Array HPV Genotyping test detecting 37 HPV types and compared with Hybrid Capture II (HCII) assay for detection of carcinogenic HPV. Histologic outcomes of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or worse (CIN2+) and CIN3+ were the primary endpoints. Clinical performance, including receiver operating characteristics, was determined for both tests.
RESULTS: HCII and linear array (LA) were concordant in 88.1% (433/491; 95% CI 85.3%-91.0%), having a substantial agreement with regular kappa (kappa = 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.77) and almost perfect agreement with weighted kappa (ICC = 0.82, 95% CI 0.7-0.85). In detecting CIN2+ and CIN3+, LA is 5% and 6% more sensitive but 9.5% and 8.7% less specific than HCII (area under ROC curve; P = 0.317 and P = 0.875, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Performance of HCII and LA does not significantly differ in detecting CIN2+ or CIN3+.
STUDY DESIGN: A series of 575 women referred for colposcopy due to an abnormal Pap smear were analyzed with the Linear Array HPV Genotyping test detecting 37 HPV types and compared with Hybrid Capture II (HCII) assay for detection of carcinogenic HPV. Histologic outcomes of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or worse (CIN2+) and CIN3+ were the primary endpoints. Clinical performance, including receiver operating characteristics, was determined for both tests.
RESULTS: HCII and linear array (LA) were concordant in 88.1% (433/491; 95% CI 85.3%-91.0%), having a substantial agreement with regular kappa (kappa = 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.77) and almost perfect agreement with weighted kappa (ICC = 0.82, 95% CI 0.7-0.85). In detecting CIN2+ and CIN3+, LA is 5% and 6% more sensitive but 9.5% and 8.7% less specific than HCII (area under ROC curve; P = 0.317 and P = 0.875, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Performance of HCII and LA does not significantly differ in detecting CIN2+ or CIN3+.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAgedColposcopyDNA, ViralFemaleFranceHumansMiddle AgedNucleic Acid HybridizationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPapanicolaou TestPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsPredictive Value of TestsPrevalenceSensitivity and SpecificityUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaginal SmearsUterine Cervical Dysplasia