The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus Testing in Primary Screening for Cervical Abnormalities: Comparison of Sensitivity, Specificity, and Frequency of Referral
Abstract
CONTEXT: Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing of women having Papanicolaou (Pap) smears showing atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) has clinical usefulness. Whether HPV DNA testing alone is useful in primary screening remains to be determined. OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of HPV DNA testing for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or cancer (the criterion standard). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Between December 1997 and October 2000, 4075 women who attended Planned Parenthood clinics in Washington State were screened simultaneously using thin-layer Pap and HPV DNA testing by a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method and by a liquid-based RNA-DNA hybridization capture with signal amplification assay (signal amplification). Women who were positive for high-risk HPV types, or had Pap results of ASCUS or higher, were considered to have positive screening test results and were referred for colposcopy and biopsy. Additionally, a random sample of women with negative screening test results was referred for colposcopy. Based on individual and combined thin-layer Pap, HPV PCR, and HPV signal amplification test results from the screening and the colposcopy visits, 7 colposcopy triage strategies were defined and evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Sensitivity and specificity for detecting cervical lesions graded CIN 3 or higher for each of the 7 triage strategies. RESULTS: The estimated prevalence of CIN 3 or higher was 3.2%. The sensitivity (95% confidence interval) of thin-layer Pap (with a result of > or = ASCUS) for identifying women with CIN 3 or higher was only 61.3% (48.5%-70.9%) compared with 88.2% (78.9%-93.8%) for HPV testing by PCR and 90.8% (83.1%-95.8%) by signal amplification. Differences in specificities were also observed: 82.4% (81.8%-83.1%) for thin-layer Pap (with a result of > or = ASCUS), 78.8% (77.9%-79.7%) for PCR, and 72.6% (69.4%-75.0%) for signal amplification. Compared with referral for colposcopy of all women with ASCUS or higher, signal amplification testing of women with ASCUS and referral of those with a positive result was about as sensitive (61.3% vs 60.3%, respectively) and significantly more specific (82.4% vs 88.9%, respectively). The strategy requiring repeat positive PCR tests on 2 visits had a sensitivity of 84.2% (75.3%-91.0%) and a specificity of 86.2% (85.1%-87.3%). All tests were more specific and less sensitive in older (> or = 30 years) vs younger women. CONCLUSIONS: Testing for HPV has higher sensitivity but lower specificity than thin-layer Pap screening. In some settings, particularly where screening intervals are long or haphazard, screening for HPV DNA may be a reasonable alternative to cytology-based screening of reproductive-age women.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Screening for cervical cancer: U.S. preventive services Task force recommendation statement
Moyer, V. A., & on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force* (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-156-12-201206190-00424 · Cited by 1,049
Clifford, G. M., Rana, R. K., Franceschi, S., Smith, J. S., Gough, G., & Pimenta, J. M. (2005) · Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-04-0812 · Cited by 533
Wright, T. C., Schiffman, M., Solomon, D., Cox, J. T., Garcia, F., Goldie, S., Hatch, K., Noller, K. L., Roach, N., Runowicz, C., et al. (2004) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/01.aog.0000109426.82624.f8 · Cited by 499
Cytology versus HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in the general population
Koliopoulos, G., Nyaga, V. N., Santesso, N., Bryant, A., Martin-Hirsch, P. P., Mustafa, R. A., Schünemann, H., Paraskevaidis, E., & Arbyn, M. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd008587.pub2 · Cited by 494
Sankaranarayanan, R., Basu, P., Wesley, R. S., Mahe, C., Keita, N., Mbalawa, C. C. G., Sharma, R., Dolo, A., Shastri, S. S., Nacoulma, M., et al. (2004) · International Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1002/ijc.20190 · Cited by 319
Metadata
- Authors
- Kulasingam, S. L., Hughes, J. P., Kiviat, N. B., Mao, C., Weiss, N. S., Kuypers, J. M., & Koutsky, L. A.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2002-10-09
- Volume
- 288
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 1749
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W1973908661
- Cited by
- 452
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 23.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus Testing in Primary Screening for Cervical Abnormalities: Comparison of Sensitivity, Specificity, and Frequency of Referral. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.288.14.1749
- The paper
- Kulasingam, S. L., Hughes, J. P., Kiviat, N. B., Mao, C., Weiss, N. S., Kuypers, J. M., & Koutsky, L. A. (2002). Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus Testing in Primary Screening for Cervical Abnormalities: Comparison of Sensitivity, Specificity, and Frequency of Referral. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.288.14.1749
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.