ArticleInternational journal of women's health2023
Can HPV Test on Random Urine Replace Self-HPV Test on Vaginal Self-Samples or Clinician-Collected Cervical Samples?
Article in International journal of women's health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical value of first-morning urine exfoliated cell HPV detection in the diagnosis of high-grade cervical lesions.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- High-risk human papillomavirus testing in first-void urine as a novel and non-invasive cervical cancer screening modality-a Danish diagnostic test accuracy study.BMC medicine · 2025Observational
- Advances in cervical cancer: current insights and future directions.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2025Review
- The Utility of an Human Papillomavirus Genotype Assay for Cancer Screening in Self-Collected Urine and Vaginal Samples from Japanese Women.Gynecologic and obstetric investigation · 2025Article
- Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling devices for human Papillomavirus detection: A systematic review.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study investigated whether random urine (RU) samples can be used to accurately identify human papillomavirus (HPV) and whether these samples can replace self-collected vaginal samples in HPV tests. Methods: A total of 167 patients with abnormal Pap smears were recruited. The patients provided self-collected vaginal and RU samples for HPV testing. Clinicians obtained cervical samples from the patients. Colposcopy examination and cervical biopsy were performed. Hybrid Capture II (HC II) and Cervista tests were used to detect HPV in the RU samples. Results: The results of tests on clinician-collected cervical samples were used as the benchmark. The sensitivities of the Cervista tests on vaginal samples and the HC II and Cervista tests on RU samples were 75.00%, 49.07%, and 44.44%, respectively. After we adjusted the HPV detection cutoff value for urine samples based on values in the receiver operating characteristic curve, the sensitivities of the HC II and Cervista tests increased to 63.89% and 58.33%, respectively. In 167 patients, 59 had cervix biopsies showing CIN2 or worse (CIN2+). For CIN2+, the sensitivity was 47.5% and 50.8% in the HC II and Cervista tests on RU samples, respectively. Conclusion: HPV tests on RU samples had approximately 60% sensitivity to HPV tests on clinician-collected cervical samples after the cutoff values were adjusted. For CIN2+, the sensitivity was only approximately 50%. Further studies and improvements in urine-based HPV testing are needed to establish it as a more convenient and accessible method for detecting HPV and cervical dysplasia in patients.
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.