ArticleJournal of pathology and translational medicine2016
Clinical Significance of an HPV DNA Chip Test with Emphasis on HPV-16 and/or HPV-18 Detection in Korean Gynecological Patients.
Article in Journal of pathology and translational medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Comparison of the PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip Test with the Cobas 4800 HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 Tests for Detection of HPV in ASCUS Women.Yonsei medical journal · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman papillomavirus (HPV) is a major risk factor for cervical cancer.
methodsWe evaluated the clinical significance of the HPV DNA chip genotyping assay (MyHPV chip, Mygene Co.) compared with the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) chemiluminescent nucleic acid hybridization kit (Digene Corp.) in 867 patients.
resultsThe concordance rate between the MyHPV chip and HC2 was 79.4% (kappa coefficient, κ = 0.55). The sensitivity and specificity of both HPV tests were very similar (approximately 85% and 50%, respectively). The addition of HPV result (either MyHPV chip or HC2) to cytology improved the sensitivity (95%, each) but reduced the specificity (approximately 30%, each) compared with the HPV test or cytology alone. Based on the MyHPV chip results, the odds ratio (OR) for ≥ high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs) was 9.9 in the HPV-16/18 (+) group and 3.7 in the non-16/18 high-risk (HR)-HPV (+) group. Based on the HC2 results, the OR for ≥ HSILs was 5.9 in the HR-HPV (+) group. When considering only patients with cytological diagnoses of "negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy" and "atypical squamous cell or atypical glandular cell," based on the MyHPV chip results, the ORs for ≥ HSILs were 6.8 and 11.7, respectively, in the HPV-16/18 (+) group.
conclusionsThe sensitivity and specificity of the MyHPV chip test are similar to the HC2. Detecting HPV-16/18 with an HPV DNA chip test, which is commonly used in many Asian countries, is useful in assessing the risk of high-grade cervical lesions.
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.