ArticlePloS one2012
Development of a bead-based multiplex genotyping method for diagnostic characterization of HPV infection.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human papilloma virus: A review study of epidemiology, carcinogenesis, diagnostic methods, and treatment of all HPV-related cancers.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Review
- Correlation between Human Papillomavirus Codetection Profiles and Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia in Japanese Women.Microorganisms · 2020Article
- Epidemiologic characterization of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in various regions of Yunnan Province of China.BMC infectious diseases · 2016Article
- Development of a Multiplex PCR Test with Automated Genotyping Targeting E7 for Detection of Six High-Risk Human Papillomaviruses.PloS one · 2015Article
- Comparison of the digene HPV genotyping LQ test and the PANArray HPV genotyping chip for detection of high-risk or probable high-risk human papillomavirus genotypes.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The accurate genotyping of human papillomavirus (HPV) is clinically important because the oncogenic potential of HPV is dependent on specific genotypes. Here, we described the development of a bead-based multiplex HPV genotyping (MPG) method which is able to detect 20 types of HPV (15 high-risk HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 53, 56, 58, 59, 66, 68 and 5 low-risk HPV types 6, 11, 40, 55, 70) and evaluated its accuracy with sequencing. A total of 890 clinical samples were studied. Among these samples, 484 were HPV positive and 406 were HPV negative by consensus primer (PGMY09/11) directed PCR. The genotyping of 484 HPV positive samples was carried out by the bead-based MPG method. The accuracy was 93.5% (95% CI, 91.0-96.0), 80.1% (95% CI, 72.3-87.9) for single and multiple infections, respectively, while a complete type mismatch was observed only in one sample. The MPG method indiscriminately detected dysplasia of several cytological grades including 71.8% (95% CI, 61.5-82.3) of ASCUS (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) and more specific for high grade lesions. For women with HSIL (high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) and SCC diagnosis, 32 women showed a PPV (positive predictive value) of 77.3% (95% CI, 64.8-89.8). Among women >40 years of age, 22 women with histological cervical cancer lesions showed a PPV of 88% (95% CI, 75.3-100). Of the highest risk HPV types including HPV-16, 18 and 31 positive women of the same age groups, 34 women with histological cervical cancer lesions showed a PPV of 77.3% (95% CI, 65.0-89.6). Taken together, the bead-based MPG method could successfully detect high-grade lesions and high-risk HPV types with a high degree of accuracy in clinical samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.