Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21430098›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2011

Comparison of clinical and analytical performance of the Abbott Realtime High Risk HPV test to the performance of hybrid capture 2 in population-based cervical cancer screening.

Mario Poljak, Anja Ostrbenk, Katja Seme, Veronika Ucakar, Peter Hillemanns, Eda Vrtacnik Bokal, Nina Jancar, Irena Klavs

Open access · greenAbstract 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 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Amplification chemistries in clinical virology.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2019
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Clinical Evaluation of INNO-LiPA HPV GenotypingInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Mario PoljakFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Ljubljana Zaloška 4, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia. mario.poljak@mf.uni-lj.si
Anja Ostrbenk
Katja Seme
Veronika Ucakar
Peter Hillemanns
Eda Vrtacnik Bokal
Nina Jancar
Irena Klavs
University of Ljubljana · SILjubljana University Medical Centre · SINational Institute of Public Health · SIMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical performance of the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV (human papillomavirus) test (RealTime) and that of the Hybrid Capture 2 HPV DNA test (hc2) were prospectively compared in the population-based cervical cancer screening setting. In women >30 years old (n = 3,129), the clinical sensitivity of RealTime for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 (CIN2) or worse (38 cases) and its clinical specificity for lesions of less than CIN2 (3,091 controls) were 100% and 93.3%, respectively, and those of hc2 were 97.4% and 91.8%, respectively. A noninferiority score test showed that the clinical specificity (P < 0.0001) and clinical sensitivity (P = 0.011) of RealTime were noninferior to those of hc2 at the recommended thresholds of 98% and 90%. In the total study population (women 20 to 64 years old; n = 4,432; 57 cases, 4,375 controls), the clinical sensitivity and specificity of RealTime were 98.2% and 89.5%, and those of hc2 were 94.7% and 87.7%, respectively. The analytical sensitivity and analytical specificity of RealTime in detecting targeted HPV types evaluated with the largest sample collection to date (4,479 samples) were 94.8% and 99.8%, and those of hc2 were 93.4% and 97.8%, respectively. Excellent analytical agreement between the two assays was obtained (kappa value, 0.84), while the analytical accuracy of RealTime was significantly higher than that of hc2. RealTime demonstrated high intralaboratory reproducibility and interlaboratory agreement with 500 samples retested 61 to 226 days after initial testing in two different laboratories. RealTime can be considered to be a reliable and robust HPV assay clinically comparable to hc2 for the detection of CIN2+ lesions in a population-based cervical cancer screening setting.

Indexed as

AdultEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMiddle AgedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVirology

Identifiers

PMID21430098
PMCPMC3122641
OpenAlexW2016496743

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.