Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21325553›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2011

Comparison of clinical performance of Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test with that of hybrid capture 2 assay in a screening setting.

F M Carozzi, E Burroni, S Bisanzi, D Puliti, M Confortini, P Giorgi Rossi, C Sani, A Scalisi, F Chini

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

F M CarozziAnalytical Cytology and Biomolecular Unit, ISPO, Cancer Prevention and Research Institute, Florence, Italy. f.carozzi@ispo.toscana.it
E Burroni
S Bisanzi
D Puliti
M Confortini
P Giorgi Rossi
C Sani
A Scalisi
F Chini

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized trials have produced sound evidence about the efficacy of screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA tests in reducing cervical cancer incidence and mortality. We evaluated the clinical performance and reproducibility of the Abbott RealTime High Risk (HR) HPV test compared with that of the HR hybrid capture 2 (HC2) assay as assessed by a noninferiority score test. A random sample of 998 cervical specimens (914 specimens of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia less severe than grade 2 [<CIN2] and 84 specimens of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe lesions [≥CIN2]), collected in the Florence and Catania cervical Cancer Screening Programs from women aged 25 to 64 and already tested by HR HC2, were retested with the Abbott RealTime HR HPV test. Absolute specificity was 92.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.4 to 94.0) and 92.6% (95% CI, 90.7 to 94.2) for the Abbott RealTime HR HPV test and the HR HC2, respectively. Absolute sensitivity was 96.4% (95% CI, 89.9 to 99.3) and 97.6% (95% CI, 91.7 to 99.7) for the Abbott RealTime HR HPV test and the HR HC2, respectively. The noninferiority score test revealed that the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the Abbott RealTime HR HPV test were not inferior (P = 0.004 and 0.009, respectively) to those of HR HC2. Overall agreement between the two assays was 96.5%, with a k value of 0.86 (CI 95%, 0.82 to 0.91). We evaluated the intralaboratory reproducibility by retesting 521 samples at least 4 weeks after the first test; the crude agreement between the first and second test was 98.5%, with an overall k value of 0.97 (CI 95%, 0.95 to 0.99). This test fully satisfies the requirements of a primary cervical cancer screening test. This assay differentiates between HPV16, HPV18, and non-HPV16/18 types in every specimen, but how to use this information in a screening setting still is unclear.

Indexed as

AdultCervix UteriFemaleHumansItalyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsReagent Kits, DiagnosticSensitivity and SpecificityVirologyReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID21325553
PMCPMC3122806

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.