Comparison of Human Papillomavirus Detection and Typing by Cycle Sequencing, Line Blotting, and Hybrid Capture
Open accessAbstract
We compared the results of human papillomavirus (HPV) detection and typing from 781 cervical samples assayed by three methods: L1 consensus PCR followed by cycle sequencing, L1 consensus PCR with biotinylated primers followed by hybridization to a line blot, and Hybrid Capture assay. Both PCR assays used L1 consensus PCR with primers MY09 and MY11. We evaluated the amplification efficiencies of both PCR assays and also compared the specific HPV types detected by each method. The samples positive by the Hybrid Capture assay were compared to the specific types detected by the PCR-based assays. The concordance between the two PCR assays in producing an HPV amplicon visible by gel electrophoresis or in detecting any HPV type was moderate: kappa values were 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.56 to 0.67) and 0.51 (95% CI = 0.46 to 0.58), respectively. The McNemar test for correlated proportions indicated that biotinylated PCR was less likely to produce a band ( P = 0.001) and to detect an HPV type ( P = 0.001) than the other PCR assay. In comparing the Hybrid Capture assay results with the HPV types detected by the PCR-based assays, we found that positivity by the Hybrid Capture assay for a number of samples may be due to cross-hybridization with HPV types not included in the Hybrid Capture assay probe cocktails.
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
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.
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?
Co-amplification of β-globin with HPV DNA or the presence of multiple HPV types can result in competition for assay reagents and hamper assay performance.
“As previously reported with consensus PCR assays, the co-amplification of β-globin with HPV DNA or the presence of multiple HPV types can result in competition for assay reagents and hamper assay performance [21,22].”
From Comparative evaluation of Allplex HPV28 and Anyplex II HPV28 assays for high-risk HPV genotyping in cervical samples (2025) · cites this paper as [22]
The Discussion says co-amplification of HPV and β-globin could explain reduced amplification efficiency and that samples with multiple HPV types may yield preferential amplification and inaccurate results. It does not identify competition for assay reagents as the mechanism, so that part of the claim is unsupported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- [1]Coutlee F, Gravitt P, Richardson H, Hankins C, Franco E, Lapointe N, Voyer H the Canadian Women's HIV Study Group. Nonisotopic detection and typing of human papillomavirus DNA in genital samples by the line blot assay. J Clin Microbiol. 1999;37:1852–1857. doi: 10.1128/jcm.37.6.1852-1857.1999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
- [2]Gravitt P C, Peyton C L, Apple R J, Wheeler C M. Genotyping of 27 human papillomavirus types by using L1 consensus PCR products by a single-hybridization, reverse line blot detection method. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36:3020–3027. doi: 10.1128/jcm.36.10.3020-3027.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [3]Harnish D G, Belland L M, Scheid E E, Rohan T E. Evaluation of human papillomavirus-consensus primers for HPV detection by the polymerase chain reaction. Mol Cell Probes. 1999;13:9–21. doi: 10.1006/mcpr.1998.0203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [4]Manos M, Ting Y, Wright D K, Lewis A J, Broker T R, Wolinsky S M. Use of polymerase chain reaction amplification for the detection of genital human papillomavirus. Cancer Cells. 1989;7:209–214. [Google Scholar]
- [5]McClure M A, Perrault J. RNA virus genomes hybridization to cellular rRNAs and to each other. J Virol. 1986;57:917–921. doi: 10.1128/jvi.57.3.917-921.1986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [6]Peyton C L, Schiffman M, Lorincz A T, Hunt W E, Mielzynska I, Bratti C, Eaton S, Hildesheim A, Morera L A, Rodriguez A C, Herrero R, Sherman M E, Wheeler C M. Comparison of PCR- and Hybrid Capture-based papillomavirus detection systems using multiple cervical specimen collection strategies. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36:3248–3254. doi: 10.1128/jcm.36.11.3248-3254.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [7]Tucker R A, Johnson P R, Reeves W C, Icenogle J P. Using the polymerase chain reaction to genotype human papillomavirus DNAs in samples containing multiple HPVs may produce inaccurate results. J Virol Methods. 1993;43:321–334. doi: 10.1016/0166-0934(93)90150-p. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [8]Unger E R, Vernon S D, Thoms W W, Nisenbaum R, Spann C O, Horowitz I R, Icenogle J P, Reeves W C. Human papillomavirus and disease-free survival in FIGO stage Ib cervical cancer. J Infect Dis. 1995;172:1184–1190. doi: 10.1093/infdis/172.5.1184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dalstein, V., Merlin, S., Bali, C., Saunier, M., Dachez, R., & Ronsin, C. (2009) · Journal of Virological Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jviromet.2008.11.002 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Anogenital human papillomavirus in sexually abused and nonabused children: a multicenter study.
Unger, E. R., Fajman, N. N., Maloney, E. M., Onyekwuluje, J., Swan, D. C., Howard, L., Beck-Sague, C. M., Sawyer, M. K., Girardet, R. G., Sautter, R. L., et al. (2011) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2010-2247 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Self-citationMafi, S., Theuillon, F., Meyer, S., Woillard, J.-B., Dupont, M., Rogez, S., Alain, S., & Hantz, S. (2025) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0320978 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“As previously reported with consensus PCR assays, the co-amplification of β-globin with HPV DNA or the presence of multiple HPV types can result in competition for assay reagents and hamper assay performance [21,22].”
- Authors
- Vernon, S. D., Unger, E. R., & Williams, D.
- Affiliations
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2000-02
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 651-655
- ISSN
- 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-660X
- PMC
- PMC86168
- OpenAlex
- W2102295229
- Cited by
- 141
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 8.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- europepmc.org
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (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 › Otorhinolaryngology › Head and Neck Cancer Studies
- Keywords
- human papillomavirus, HPV testing, HPV typing, biotinylated primers, hybrid capture assay, cervical samples, assay concordance, cross-hybridization
- MeSH terms
- Cervix Uteri, DNA, Viral, Electrophoresis, Agar Gel, Female, Humans, Tumor Virus Infections, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Biotinylation, 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