ArticlePloS one2016
A Low-Cost HPV Immunochromatographic Assay to Detect High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Accuracy of HPV E6/E7 oncoprotein tests to detect high-grade cervical lesions: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.British journal of cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Analysis of Pathological Discrepancies Between Colposcopic Biopsy and Conization in Cytology-Positive Cervical Lesions.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Onco E6 point of care rapid diagnostic test for human papilloma virus in Bahir Dar, Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia.PloS one · 2025Article
- Human Papillomaviruses 16 and 18 E6 Oncoprotein Detection Test in Primary Oropharyngeal Carcinomas and Metastatic Lymph Nodes: A Cross-Sectional Study.Head and neck pathology · 2024Article
- Novel competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of the high-risk Human Papillomavirus 18 E6 oncoprotein.PloS one · 2023Article
- PARP1: A Potential Molecular Marker to Identify Cancer During Colposcopy Procedures.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Development of Low-Cost Point-of-Care Technologies for Cervical Cancer Prevention Based on a Single-Board Computer.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2020Article
- HPV E6/E7 mRNA test for the detection of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+): a systematic review.Infectious agents and cancer · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the reproducibility and accuracy of the HPV16/18-E6 test.
methodsThe study population was comprised of 448 women with a previously abnormal Pap who were referred to the Barretos Cancer Hospital (Brazil) for diagnosis and treatment. Two cervical samples were collected immediately before colposcopy, one for the hr-HPV-DNA test and cytology and the other for the HPV16/18-E6 test using high-affinity monoclonal antibodies (mAb). Women with a histologic diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 were considered to be positive cases. Different strategies using a combination of screening methods (HPV-DNA) and triage tests (cytology and HPV16/18-E6) were also examined and compared.
resultsThe HPV16/18-E6 test exhibited a lower positivity rate compared with the HPV-DNA test (19.0% vs. 29.3%, p<0.001) and a moderate/high agreement (kappa = 0.68, 95%CI: 0.60-0.75). It also exhibited a significantly lower sensitivity for CIN2+ and CIN3+ detection compared to the HPV-DNA test and a significantly higher specificity. The HPV16/18-E6 test was no different from cytology in terms of sensitivity, but it exhibited a significantly higher specificity in comparison to ASCH+. A triage test after HPV-DNA detection using the HPV16/18-E6 test exhibited a significantly higher specificity compared with a triage test of ASCH+ to CIN2+ (91.8% vs. 87.4%, p = 0.04) and CIN3+ (88.6% vs. 84.0%, p = 0.05).
conclusionThe HPV16/18-E6 test exhibited moderate/high agreement with the HPV-DNA test but lower sensitivity and higher specificity for the detection of CIN2+ and CIN3+. In addition, its performance was quite similar to cytology, but because of the structural design addressed for the detection of HPV16/18-E6 protein, the test can miss some CIN2/3+ lesions caused by other high-risk HPV 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.