Comparison of HPV detection technologies: Hybrid capture 2, PreTect HPV-Proofer and analysis of HPV DNA viral load in HPV16, HPV18 and HPV33 E6/E7 mRNA positive specimens.

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/208026
Title:
Comparison of HPV detection technologies: Hybrid capture 2, PreTect HPV-Proofer and analysis of HPV DNA viral load in HPV16, HPV18 and HPV33 E6/E7 mRNA positive specimens.
Authors:
Keegan, Helen; Mc Inerney, Jamie; Pilkington, Loretto; Gronn, Petter; Silva, Ivan; Karlsen, Frank; Bolger, Noel; Logan, Catriona; Furuberg, Liv; O'Leary, John; Martin, Cara
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, Coombe Women and Infants University Hospital, Dublin 8, , Ireland. keeganh28@gmail.com
Citation:
J Virol Methods. 2009 Jan;155(1):61-6. Epub 2008 Nov 13.
Journal:
Journal of virological methods
Issue Date:
1-Feb-2012
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/208026
DOI:
10.1016/j.jviromet.2008.09.027
PubMed ID:
18955086
Abstract:
Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing using molecular methods in liquid based cytology (LBC) specimens may be useful as an adjunct to cervical screening by cytology. We compared the positivity rate of the commercially available HPV DNA method hybrid capture 2 (hc2) and the commercially available E6/E7 mRNA method PreTect HPV-Proofer in cytological specimens (n=299). LBC specimens collected (n=299) represented the following cervical cytological disease categories: Normal (n=60), borderline nuclear abnormalities (BNA) (n=34), CIN1 (n=121), CIN2 (n=60), CIN3 (n=24). Overall, 69% (205/299) of the cases were positive by hc2 and 38% (112/299) of the cases were positive by PreTect HPV-Proofer. Concordance rates between the two tests were highest in the high-grade cytology cases (CIN2: 67% and CIN3: 83%) and the normal cytology cases (88%) and lowest in the BNA and CIN1 categories (56% and 52%). HPV DNA viral load analyses were carried out on HPV16 (n=55), HPV18 (n=9) and HPV33 (n=13) samples that were positive by PreTect HPV-Proofer. The sensitivity and specificity of PreTect HPV-Proofer and the hc2 DNA test for the detection of high-grade cytology (i.e. CIN2+) were 71.4% and 75.8% vs 100% and 43.7%, respectively. The relatively low detection rate observed by PreTect HPV-Proofer in the whole range of cytological positive cases, combined with a relatively higher specificity and PPV, suggests that PreTect HPV-Proofer may be more useful than hc2 for triage and in predicting high-grade disease.
Language:
eng
MeSH:
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia/diagnosis/virology; Cervix Uteri/*virology; DNA, Viral/*analysis; Female; Human papillomavirus 16/genetics/isolation & purification; Human papillomavirus 18/genetics/isolation & purification; Humans; Mass Screening/methods; Oncogene Proteins, Viral/genetics/*metabolism; Papillomaviridae/classification/genetics/*isolation & purification; Papillomavirus E7 Proteins/genetics/*metabolism; Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis/virology; Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods; RNA, Messenger/genetics/*metabolism; RNA, Viral/*analysis/genetics/metabolism; Sensitivity and Specificity; Viral Load
ISSN:
0166-0934 (Print); 0166-0934 (Linking)

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorKeegan, Helenen_GB
dc.contributor.authorMc Inerney, Jamieen_GB
dc.contributor.authorPilkington, Lorettoen_GB
dc.contributor.authorGronn, Petteren_GB
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Ivanen_GB
dc.contributor.authorKarlsen, Franken_GB
dc.contributor.authorBolger, Noelen_GB
dc.contributor.authorLogan, Catrionaen_GB
dc.contributor.authorFuruberg, Liven_GB
dc.contributor.authorO'Leary, Johnen_GB
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Caraen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-01T10:58:04Z-
dc.date.available2012-02-01T10:58:04Z-
dc.date.issued2012-02-01T10:58:04Z-
dc.identifier.citationJ Virol Methods. 2009 Jan;155(1):61-6. Epub 2008 Nov 13.en_GB
dc.identifier.issn0166-0934 (Print)en_GB
dc.identifier.issn0166-0934 (Linking)en_GB
dc.identifier.pmid18955086en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jviromet.2008.09.027en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/208026-
dc.description.abstractHuman papillomavirus (HPV) testing using molecular methods in liquid based cytology (LBC) specimens may be useful as an adjunct to cervical screening by cytology. We compared the positivity rate of the commercially available HPV DNA method hybrid capture 2 (hc2) and the commercially available E6/E7 mRNA method PreTect HPV-Proofer in cytological specimens (n=299). LBC specimens collected (n=299) represented the following cervical cytological disease categories: Normal (n=60), borderline nuclear abnormalities (BNA) (n=34), CIN1 (n=121), CIN2 (n=60), CIN3 (n=24). Overall, 69% (205/299) of the cases were positive by hc2 and 38% (112/299) of the cases were positive by PreTect HPV-Proofer. Concordance rates between the two tests were highest in the high-grade cytology cases (CIN2: 67% and CIN3: 83%) and the normal cytology cases (88%) and lowest in the BNA and CIN1 categories (56% and 52%). HPV DNA viral load analyses were carried out on HPV16 (n=55), HPV18 (n=9) and HPV33 (n=13) samples that were positive by PreTect HPV-Proofer. The sensitivity and specificity of PreTect HPV-Proofer and the hc2 DNA test for the detection of high-grade cytology (i.e. CIN2+) were 71.4% and 75.8% vs 100% and 43.7%, respectively. The relatively low detection rate observed by PreTect HPV-Proofer in the whole range of cytological positive cases, combined with a relatively higher specificity and PPV, suggests that PreTect HPV-Proofer may be more useful than hc2 for triage and in predicting high-grade disease.en_GB
dc.language.isoengen_GB
dc.subject.meshCervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia/diagnosis/virologyen_GB
dc.subject.meshCervix Uteri/*virologyen_GB
dc.subject.meshDNA, Viral/*analysisen_GB
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_GB
dc.subject.meshHuman papillomavirus 16/genetics/isolation & purificationen_GB
dc.subject.meshHuman papillomavirus 18/genetics/isolation & purificationen_GB
dc.subject.meshHumansen_GB
dc.subject.meshMass Screening/methodsen_GB
dc.subject.meshOncogene Proteins, Viral/genetics/*metabolismen_GB
dc.subject.meshPapillomaviridae/classification/genetics/*isolation & purificationen_GB
dc.subject.meshPapillomavirus E7 Proteins/genetics/*metabolismen_GB
dc.subject.meshPapillomavirus Infections/diagnosis/virologyen_GB
dc.subject.meshPolymerase Chain Reaction/methodsen_GB
dc.subject.meshRNA, Messenger/genetics/*metabolismen_GB
dc.subject.meshRNA, Viral/*analysis/genetics/metabolismen_GB
dc.subject.meshSensitivity and Specificityen_GB
dc.subject.meshViral Loaden_GB
dc.titleComparison of HPV detection technologies: Hybrid capture 2, PreTect HPV-Proofer and analysis of HPV DNA viral load in HPV16, HPV18 and HPV33 E6/E7 mRNA positive specimens.en_GB
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Pathology, Coombe Women and Infants University Hospital, Dublin 8, , Ireland. keeganh28@gmail.comen_GB
dc.identifier.journalJournal of virological methodsen_GB
dc.description.provinceLeinster-

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.