Cited by 55Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchReproductive tract infections researchWomen's cancer prevention and management

Comparison of the anyplex II HPV28 assay with the hybrid capture 2 assay for the detection of HPV infection

Kwon, Min-Jung, Roh, Kyoung Ho, Park, Hyosoon, Woo, Hee-Yeon·2014·Journal of Clinical Virology

Abstract

Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is an important part of cervical cancer screening and management of women with abnormal cytology results. The Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) has been recommended for use as a reference test. Objective To evaluate a new real-time PCR assay (Anyplex II HPV28) for detecting high risk (HR) HPV and to compare it to the HC2. In addition, we compared the genotyping results of the Anyplex II HPV28 to those of sequencing analysis. Study design A total of 1114 cervical swab specimens were consecutively obtained from a single healthcare center. We submitted all specimens for HPV detection with Anyplex II HPV28 and HC2, then analyzed the discordant results using multiplex PCR followed by direct sequencing. Results HC2 detected 72 (6.5%) cases with HR HPV, while Anyplex II HPV28 identified 138 (12.4%) cases. The overall agreement rate was 91.4% (1018/1114) of cases. Discordant results between these two assays were observed in 96 cases; 15 were positive only by HC2, and 81 were positive only by Anyplex II HPV28. Sequencing analyses performed in 80 cases of discordant results revealed 11 false-positive, and 67 false-negative results using HC2 tests and two false-positive results using Anyplex II HPV28. Conclusions The Anyplex II HPV28 assay is analytically more sensitive in the detection of the 13 HR types represented by the HC2 assay and exhibited a higher concordance with comprehensive genotyping based on the sequencing analysis, and it could be used…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcv.2014.01.015

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 55

Authors
Kwon, M.-J., Roh, K. H., Park, H., & Woo, H.-Y.
Affiliations
Kangbuk Samsung Hospital (KR)
Corresponding author
Woo, Hee-Yeon
Venue
Journal of Clinical Virology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-04
Volume
59
Issue
4
Pages
246-249
ISSN
1386-6532 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1983858378
Cited by
55
References
27
Citations by year
2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 6
FWCI
6.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Virology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
Keywords
Hybrid Capture 2, HPV testing, high-risk HPV, HPV genotyping, cervical cancer screening, assay comparison, assay sensitivity, false positives and false negatives
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Virology, Molecular Diagnostic Techniques, Papillomaviridae, Papillomavirus Infections, Early Detection of Cancer, Young Adult, Genotyping Techniques, Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

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