ArticleBMC women's health2023
Does full HPV genotyping perform similarly well in clinician-collected cervical samples and self-collected vaginal samples when using the CLART HPV4S assay?
Article in BMC women's health, 2023. 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.
- Article
- High Concordance between Vaginal Samples and Cervical Samples of Human Papillomavirus in Women Living with HIV in Rwanda.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies comparing self-collected vaginal samples with clinician-collected cervical samples with respect to high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) detection and genotype agreement based on clinically validated full HPV genotype assays (e.g. the CLART HPV4S) are limited. This study compared the two types of samples using the CLART assay with respect to HPV detection and genotype agreement in a referral population.
methodsA total of 212 women aged 30-59 years and diagnosed with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) within the Danish cervical cancer screening programme had a cervical sample taken at their general practitioner. Afterwards, the women took a vaginal sample with the Evalyn Brush device at home. The paired samples were HPV-tested with the full genotyping CLART HPV4S assay. Histological results, i.e. cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) were available for 14 women with HPV-positive clinician-collected samples.
resultsThe study found the same HPV prevalence in self-collected vaginal samples compared to clinician-collected cervical samples (19.3%, 95% CI 14.3-25.3% vs 18.4%, 95% CI 13.4-24.3%). The CLART HPV4S assay detected approximately the same number of CIN2+ cases in the self-collected vaginal samples compared to the clinician-collected cervical samples (13 vs 11 cases). Exactly the same genotypes were detected in 75% (21/28) of the HPV-positive paired samples, while at least one identical genotype was found in the remaining 25% (7/28) of the paired samples.
conclusionsThe CLART HPV4S assay performed similarly well in self-collected vaginal samples as in clinician-collected cervical samples with respect to both HPV detection and genotype agreement when using the Evalyn Brush and the CLART HPV4S assay in a referral population. Although further evaluation is needed, the findings suggest that full HPV genotyping based on the CLART assay can be useful when establishing HPV genotype-specific referral strategies for women tested HPV-positive by self-sampling.
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.