Cited by 73Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchReproductive tract infections researchGenital Health and Disease

Analytical evaluation of the PapilloCheck test, a new commercial DNA chip for detection and genotyping of human papillomavirus

Dalstein, Véronique, Merlin, Sandra, Bali, Corinne, Saunier, Maëlle, Dachez, Roger, Ronsin, Christophe·2009·Journal of Virological Methods

Abstract

Recently, a commercially available HPV DNA chip, the PapilloCheck test, developed by Greiner Bio-One, has become available for human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping. The PapilloCheck test is a PCR-based test using a new consensus primer set targeting the E1 HPV gene. HPV oligoprobes immobilized on a DNA chip allow for the identification of 24 HPV types from the amplified product. In the present study, the analytical performance of the PapilloCheck test is compared to the Linear Array HPV genotyping test (Roche Diagnostics). Cervical specimens collected in PreservCyt (Cytyc) solution and obtained from women who presented abnormal cytological findings were tested primarily by the Hybrid Capture 2 High-Risk assay (HC2-HR, QIAGEN). A total of 144 samples were selected according to the signal intensity obtained with the HC2-HR test, expressed as RLU/CO value, and divided into 4 groups as follows: [0-1] RLU/CO (negative HC2-HR result, 34 samples); [1-5] RLU/CO (positive HC2-HR result, 30 samples); [5-40] RLU/CO (positive HC2-HR result, 40 samples); >40 RLU/CO (positive HC2-HR result, 40 samples). The concordance levels between the HC2-HR test and each of the genotyping assays was similar (88.8%) and the crude agreement between these assays was considered as "good". The detailed analysis of the discrepant results confirmed a possibly high rate of false positive results of HC2-HR test in the 1-5 RLU/CO grey zone. Genotype-specific comparison analysis was limited to the 23 HPV types d…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jviromet.2008.11.002

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 33 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dalstein, V., Merlin, S., Bali, C., Saunier, M., Dachez, R., & Ronsin, C.
Affiliations
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Reims (FR)
  • Université de Franche-Comté (FR)
Corresponding author
Ronsin, Christophe
Venue
Journal of Virological Methods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-03
Volume
156
Issue
1-2
Pages
77-83
ISSN
0166-0934 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1983021077
Cited by
73
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
7.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Virological Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Genital Health and Disease
Keywords
human papillomavirus, HPV genotyping, DNA microarrays, E1 gene, false positives, assay concordance, cervical specimens, atypical cytology, assay comparison, high-risk HPV, HPV16, HPV 18
MeSH terms
Cervix Uteri, DNA, Viral, False Positive Reactions, Female, Genotype, Humans, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Retrospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Vaginal Smears, Reproducibility of Results, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Papillomaviridae, Papillomavirus Infections

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