The aim of the present study is to compare the performance of several commercial human papillomavirus (HPV) tests in a cohort of 281 women. The hybrid capture II, the PreTect-HPV-Proofer, the linear array, and DR.HPV™IVD were utilized to detect and type HPV in parallel with in-house PCR tests followed by direct automated sequencing or by sub-cloning and sequencing. The concordance levels along with other tests were evaluated with a Cohen's K value varying between 0.60 to 0.88, indicating good correlation with nearly perfect agreement between hybrid capture II, (HCII) and the linear array test. High sensitivity was recorded by the linear array and HCII with 100% (95% CI, 0.8021 to 1.0000) detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) III by both methods. Conversely, the PreTect-HPV-Proofer showed high specificity with 12% (95% CI, 0.7966 to 0.9163) positivity on normal samples. The genotyping analysis showed that agreement among tests was only low to moderate with great differences between different HPV types. Multiple infections were detected with poor concordance and sub-cloning assays revealed the presence of a lower number of HPV in comparison to the other methods. In summary, the use of different HPV tests applied to the same group of cervical smears may possibly lead to incongruent results, suggesting the need to standardize type-specific sensitivity of genotyping methods and the need to evaluate their accuracy in detecting multiple HPV infections. This would be a prerequisite for the use of genotyping assays in cervical cancer screening programs.
|Number of pages||12|
|Journal||International Journal of Immunopathology and Pharmacology|
|Publication status||Published - Jan 2011|
- Commercial tests
- Vaccine monitoring
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Immunology and Allergy