ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2012
Comparison of the AdvanSure human papillomavirus screening real-time PCR, the Abbott RealTime High Risk human papillomavirus test, and the Hybrid Capture human papillomavirus DNA test for the detection of human papillomavirus.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2020Article
- Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Detection in Cytologic Specimens: Similarities and Differences of Available Methodology.Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM · 2017Article
- Study-based evaluation of the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test in comparison to the HC2 HR HPV test in women aged ≥30 years using residual LBC ThinPrep specimens.BMC infectious diseases · 2016Article
- A population-based observational study comparing Cervista and Hybrid Capture 2 methods: improved relative specificity of the Cervista assay by increasing its cut-off.BMC infectious diseases · 2014Observational
- 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
- Clinical validation of AdvanSure GenoBlot assay as primary screening and test of cure for human papillomavirus infection.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2014Article
- Simultaneous detection, genotyping, and quantification of human papillomaviruses by multicolor real-time PCR and melting curve analysis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe evaluated the performance of various commercial assays for the molecular detection of human papillomavirus (HPV); the recently developed AdvanSure HPV Screening real-time PCR assay (AdvanSure PCR) and the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV PCR assay (Abbott PCR) were compared with the Hybrid Capture 2 HPV DNA Test (HC2).
methodsAll 3 tests were performed on 177 samples, and any sample that showed a discrepancy in any of the 3 tests was genotyped using INNO-LiPA HPV genotyping and/or sequencing. On the basis of these results, we obtained a consensus HPV result, and the performance of each test was evaluated. We also evaluated high-risk HPV 16/18 detection by using the 2 real-time PCR assays.
resultsAmong the 177 samples, 65 were negative and 75 were positive in all 3 assays; however, the results of the 3 assays with 37 samples were discrepant. Compared with the consensus HPV result, the sensitivities and specificities of HC2, AdvanSure PCR, and Abbott PCR were 97.6%, 91.7%, and 86.9% and 83.9%, 98.8%, and 100.0%, respectively. For HPV type 16/18 detection, the concordance rate between the AdvanSure PCR and Abbott PCR assays was 98.3%; however, 3 samples were discrepant (positive in AdvanSure PCR and negative in Abbott PCR) and were confirmed as HPV type 16 by INNO-LiPA genotyping and/or sequencing.
conclusionsFor HPV detection, the AdvanSure HPV Screening real-time PCR assay and the Abbott PCR assay are less sensitive but more specific than the HC2 assay, but can simultaneously differentiate type 16/18 HPV from other types.
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.