Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31981559›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Global health2020

Clinical evaluation of modifications to a human papillomavirus assay to optimise its utility for cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings: a diagnostic accuracy study.

Louise Kuhn, Rakiya Saidu, Rosalind Boa, Ana Tergas, Jennifer Moodley, David Persing, Scott Campbell, Wei-Yann Tsai, Thomas C Wright, Lynette Denny

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Improved cervical screening using HPV type restriction and cycle threshold limit setting with the AmpFire assay: A prospective screening cohort of women with and without HIV in Botswana.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Louise KuhnGertrude H Sergievsky Center, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons and Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: lk24@cumc.columbia.edu.
Rakiya SaiduDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Rosalind BoaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Ana TergasDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons and Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Jennifer MoodleyWomen's Health Research Unit, School of Public Health and Family Medicine and South African Medical Research Council Gynaecologic Cancer Research Centre, University of Cape Town, South Africa.
David PersingCepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.
Scott CampbellCepheid, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.
Wei-Yann TsaiDepartment of Biostatistics, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Thomas C WrightDepartment of Pathology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Lynette DennyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Columbia University Irving Medical Center · USUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

Improving specificity of HPV Screen-and-Treat in South AfricaUH3CA189908 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI KUHN, LOUISE · 2016 to 2018
$2.5M
Improving specificity of HPV Screen-and-Treat in South AfricaUH2CA189908 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI KUHN, LOUISE · 2014 to 2015
$998k
NCI NIH HHS UH2 3 CA189908NCI NIH HHS UH2 CA189908NCI NIH HHS UH3 CA189908
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHPV-based screen and treat is the recommended approach for cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings, but quite low specificity of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, particularly in women living with HIV, leads to overtreatment. We evaluated whether HPV type restriction and more stringent cutoffs on Xpert HPV optimise performance characteristics of this assay for screen and treat.

methodsWe recruited HIV-negative and HIV-positive women aged 30-65 years from a primary care facility and a referral colposcopy clinic in Cape Town, South Africa. Women included had no history of any anogenital cancer or treatment for cervical dysplasia, had no hysterectomy, and were not pregnancy at the time of recruitment. All women had cervical samples collected for Xpert HPV (an assay that detects high-risk HPV types in five channels: HPV type 16; HPV types 18 or 45, or both; HPV types 31, 33, 35, 52, or 58, or more than one of these types; HPV types 51 or 59, or both; and HPV types 39, 56, 66, or 68, or more than one of these types) and underwent colposcopy and histological sampling with consensus pathology review. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate improvements in specificity attained by modifying cycle threshold cutoffs to define screen-positive results.

resultsWe recruited 1121 women aged 30-65 years, 586 of whom were HIV-negative and 535 HIV-positive. Sensitivity of detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater in HIV-negative women using manufacturer-defined cycle threshold cutoffs for all channels was 88·7% (95% CI 83·1-94·3), and specificity was 86·9% (83·4-90·4). Sensitivity was 93·6% (90·0-97·3) and specificity 59·9% (54·1-65·7) in HIV-positive women. Cycle threshold values from channels detecting HPV type 16, HPV types 18 or 45 (or both), and HPV types 31, 33, 35, 52, or 58 (or more than one of these types) were informative to predict cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater. Shifting cycle threshold cutoffs on these three channels allowing sensitivity to decline to 75-85%, led to specificities of 91·3-95·3% in HIV-negative women and 77·0-85·8% in HIV-positive women.

interpretationMore stringent cycle threshold cutoffs on selected channels in Xpert HPV improve specificity with only modest losses in sensitivity, making this assay an optimal choice for HPV-based screen and treat in settings with a high prevalence of HIV. These modifications can be made from standard output with no need for new engineering. Decision making about performance characteristics of HPV testing can be shifted to programme implementers and cutoffs selected according to resource availability and community preferences.

fundingSupported by the National Cancer Institute UH2/3 CA189908.

Indexed as

AdultAgedEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomavirus InfectionsPoverty AreasSouth AfricaUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID31981559
PMCPMC8720235
OpenAlexW3001537731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.