Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26246482›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015

Clinical and Analytical Performance of the Onclarity HPV Assay Using the VALGENT Framework.

K Cuschieri, D T Geraets, C Moore, W Quint, E Duvall, M Arbyn

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Clinical Evaluation of INNO-LiPA HPV GenotypingInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

K CuschieriScottish HPV Reference Laboratory, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom kate.cuschieri@luht.scot.nhs.uk.
D T GeraetsDDL Diagnostic Laboratory, Rijswijk, The Netherlands.
C MooreScottish HPV Reference Laboratory, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
W QuintDDL Diagnostic Laboratory, Rijswijk, The Netherlands.
E DuvallDepartment of Pathology, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
M ArbynUnit of Cancer Epidemiology and Belgian Cancer Centre, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium.
Edinburgh Royal Infirmary · GBDDL Diagnostic Laboratory · NLInstitut Scientifique de Santé Publique · BE

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CZB/4/658
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the demand for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cervical screening increases, emerging HPV tests must be evaluated robustly using well-annotated samples, such as those generated in the Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) framework. Through VALGENT, we assessed the performance of the BD Onclarity HPV assay, which detects 14 high-risk (HR) types and resolves six individual types and three groups of types. Consecutive samples from a screening population (n = 1,000), enriched with cytologically abnormal samples (n = 300), that had been tested previously with the GP5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and the GP5+/6+ PCR LMNX assay (Diassay) were tested with the Onclarity assay. Type-specific HPV prevalences were analyzed according to age and cytological result. The accuracy of the Onclarity assay for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) and CIN3+ was assessed relative to the GP5+/6+ EIA results by using noninferiority criteria. Overall agreement and type-specific agreement between the Onclarity assay and the GP5+/6+ LMNX assay were assessed. The prevalence of HPV types 16, 18, 31, and 45 increased with the severity of cytological results (P for trend, <0.05). For the detection of CIN2+, the Onclarity assay had a relative sensitivity of 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.05; P < 0.001 for noninferiority) and a relative specificity of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.00; P = 0.186 for noninferiority). The kappa for agreement between the Onclarity assay and the GP5+/6+ LMNX assay for HR-HPV was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.94), and values for the six individual types ranged from 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.87) for HPV-52 to 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93 to 0.99) for HPV-16. These data suggest that the Onclarity assay offers applications for clinical workstreams while providing genotyping information that may be useful for risk stratification beyond types 16 and 18.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGenotyping TechniquesHumansMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsSensitivity and SpecificityUterine Cervical DysplasiaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26246482
PMCPMC4572536
OpenAlexW1904612675

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.