Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11212885›Full record

ArticleMolecular pathology : MP2001

Rapid real time PCR to distinguish between high risk human papillomavirus types 16 and 18.

H A Cubie, A L Seagar, E McGoogan, J Whitehead, A Brass, M J Arends, M W Whitley

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular pathology : MP, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Identification of HPV16-p16Epigenetics · 2021
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA prevalence and p53 codon 72 (Arg72Pro) polymorphism in prostate cancer in a Greek group of patients.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2014
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

H A CubieRegional Clinical Virology Laboratory, Lothian University Hospitals NHS Trust, City Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
A L Seagar
E McGoogan
J Whitehead
A Brass
M J Arends
M W Whitley
University of Edinburgh · GBCity Hospital · GBNHS Lothian · GBThe Queen's Medical Research Institute · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo assess the validity and practicality of real time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in combination with liquid based cytology samples for cervical screening.

methodsReal time PCR using consensus (GPS+/6+) and type specific primers was developed to detect genital HPV types. This provides rapid, efficient amplification followed by denaturation of the product and computer analysis of the kinetics data that are generated. Liquid based cytology samples were obtained from patients attending routine cervical screening clinics. DNA was extracted from the residual cellular suspension after cytology using spin columns.

resultsReal time PCR successfully distinguished between HPV-16 and HPV-18 on the basis of amplification with consensus primers followed by DNA melting temperature (Tm) analysis. Sensitivities of one to 10 copies of HPV-16 (mean Tm = 79.4 degrees C; 2 SD, 0.8) and four to 40 copies of HPV-18 (mean Tm = 80.4 degrees C; 2 SD, 0.4) were obtained. In a mixed population of SiHa and HeLa cells containing known copy numbers of HPV-16 and HPV-18 genomes, HPV-16 and HPV-18 products were clearly separated by Tm analysis in mixtures varying from equivalence to 111000. Together with detailed melt analysis, type specific primers from the same region of the L1 gene confirmed the differential ability of this system. The method was applied to 100 liquid based cytology samples where HPV status using conventional GP5+/6+ PCR was already known. There was 95% agreement between the methods, with 55 positives detected by conventional PCR and 59 with real time PCR. The method was then tested on 200 routine liquid based cytology samples. Approximately 10% were positive by real time PCR, most of which were classified as HPV-16 by detailed melt analysis. Thirteen (6.8%) HPV positives were identified in 189 samples showing no evidence of cervical cytological abnormality.

conclusionsReal time PCR is a rapid, efficient method for the detection of HPV with the separation of HPV-16 and HPV-18 on the basis of differential Tm. Preliminary results suggest it could prove

Indexed as

Cell LineCervix UteriFemaleHumansMass ScreeningPapillomaviridaePolymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsVaginal SmearsVirology

Identifiers

PMID11212885
PMCPMC1186996
OpenAlexW2139353212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.