ArticleBritish journal of cancer2013
Comparing the performance of six human papillomavirus tests in a screening population.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
85 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of different mRNA testing technologies with HPV DNA testing for predicting ASCUS triage and post-cone excision outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- A Randomized Comparison of Different Vaginal Self-sampling Devices and Urine for Human Papillomavirus Testing-Predictors 5.1.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Trial
- HPV Prevalence in the Dutch cervical cancer screening population (DuSC study): HPV testing using automated HC2, cobas and Aptima workflows.BMC cancer · 2016Trial
- Comparison of the Roche cobas® 4800 and Digene Hybrid Capture® 2 HPV tests for primary cervical cancer screening in the HPV FOCAL trial.BMC cancer · 2015Trial
- Ectocervical margin involvement is associated with postoperative hrHPV positivity after hysterectomy or residual cervix resection for incompletely excised CIN3: a retrospective study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Including p16/Ki-67 Dual Staining in the Detection of Cervical Lesions in Colombia, 2024Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia · 2026Article
- Molecular Screening for Cervical Cancer.Genes · 2025Review
- Hepatocyte nuclear factor 4 alpha immunocytochemistry: A useful marker for detecting endocervical glandular lesions in alcohol-fixed smears.Cancer cytopathology · 2025Article
- Molecular detection of hrHPV-induced high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix through a targeted RNA next generation sequencing assay.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- RNA extended interventional nucleic acid longitudinal study: Clinical performance of Aptima messenger RNA HPV testing in cervical cancer screening with a 9-year follow-up.Cancer cytopathology · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparing the performance of 2 human papillomavirus assays for a new use indication: a real-world evidence-based evaluation in the United States.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2024Article
- Detection of cervical precancerous lesions and cancer by small-scale RT-qPCR analysis of oppositely deregulated mRNAs pairs in cytological smears.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Prevalence of cervical precancers or cancers in women with ASC-H/HSIL cytology according to Aptima HPV (AHPV) assay-detected HPV genotypes and age.Journal of Cancer · 2024Article
- Enhancing Cervical Cancer Prevention in South African Women: Primary HPV mRNA Screening with Different Genotype Combinations.Cancers · 2023Article
- Comparison between the Roche Cobas 4800 Human Papillomavirus (HPV), Abbott RealTime High-Risk HPV, Seegene Anyplex II HPV28, and Novel Seegene Allplex HPV28 Assays for High-Risk HPV Detection and Genotyping in Mocked Self-Samples.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Article
- Performance of Aptima-HPV in the cervical cancer screening program of Portugal: a cost-analysis.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- A low-cost, paper-based hybrid capture assay to detect high-risk HPV DNA for cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings.Lab on a chip · 2023Article
- The routine use of LCD-Array hybridisation technique for HPV subtyping in the diagnosis of penile carcinoma compared to other methods.BMC urology · 2022Article
25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral new assays have been developed for high-risk HPV testing of cervical samples; we compare six HPV tests in a screening population.
methodsResidual material from liquid-based PreservCyt samples was assayed. Four tests (Hybrid Capture 2, Cobas, Abbott and Becton-Dickinson (BD)) measured HPV DNA while two used RNA (APTIMA and NorChip).
resultsPositivity rates ranged from 13.4 to 16.3% for the DNA-based tests with a significantly lower positivity rate for the Abbott assay. The Gen-Probe APTIMA assay was positive in 10.3% of women, which was significantly lower than all the DNA tests; the NorChip PreTect HPV-Proofer test was much lower at 5.2%. 40 CIN2+ cases were identified, of which 19 were CIN3+. All CIN3+ cases were HPV positive by all tests except for one, which was negative by the Abbott assay and five which were negative by the NorChip test.
conclusionAll HPV tests except NorChip showed high sensitivity for high-grade lesions positive by cytology, suggesting co-testing is unnecessary when using HPV tests. Positivity rates in cytology-negative specimens were similar for the DNA-based tests, but lower for the APTIMA test suggesting this maintains the high sensitivity of DNA tests, but with better specificity.
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.