ArticleYonsei medical journal2018
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.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2018. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research Progress of Nucleic Acid Detection Technology for Genetically Modified Maize.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Implementation of primary HPV testing in Japan.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2020Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the performance of the PANArray human papilloma virus (HPV) test, a PCR-based DNA microarray assay, in detecting HPV from patient samples and its concordance with the cobas 4800 HPV and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) tests. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe PANArray HPV, cobas 4800 HPV, and HC2 tests were performed on 504 cervical swab samples from patients with atypical cells of undetermined significance at five hospitals. The samples that were interpreted as 'HPV-other' type positive in the PANArray HPV test were confirmed by direct sequencing.
resultsThe concordance rates were 80.8% between the cobas 4800 HPV and PANArray HPV tests [κ=0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.66] and 80.2% (κ=0.6, 95% CI 0.55-0.68) between the HC2 and PANArray HPV tests. Among the 62 patients negative on PANArray HPV (defined as the absence of high risk HPV), but positive on both cobas 4800 HPV and HC2 tests, 42 (67.7%) tested positive for 'HPV-other' types on the PANArray HPV test, and 31 (50.0%) had gray zone results [relative light unit/control (RLU/CO), 1.4-9.25] in the HC2 test. Of the patients deemed positive by the PANArray HPV test, 43 tested positive for high-risk (HR) HPV in cobas 4800 HPV and HC 2 tests. Among them, 58.2% showed HR HPV, including HPV 16, by direct sequencing, of which 25% had gray results.
conclusionResults classified as 'HPV-other' type by the PANArray HPV test, or gray zone results by HC2 (RLU/CO ratio level 1-10) should be carefully interpreted using comprehensive clinical information.
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.