ArticleMolecular biology reports2024
Comparison of high-risk HPV detection by the AmpFire® HPV Screening 16/18/HR technique (Atila Biosystems) and the hybrid capture 2 test (Qiagen).
Article in Molecular biology reports, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening for Cervical Cancer and Early Treatment (SCCET) Project-The Programmatic Data of Romanian Experience in Primary Screening for High-Risk HPV DNA.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prioritizing the risk of cervical cancer: findings from the SCCUT Multicentre Initiative.Journal of medicine and life · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDetection of high-risk human papillomaviruses (hrHPV) is widely used at the first line of cervical cancer screening, requiring rigorous validation of the clinical performance of commercial kits designed for this indication.
methodsPerformance of the AmpFire HPV Screening 16/18/HR test (AF, Atila Biosystems) and the Hybrid Capture 2 test (HC2, Qiagen) for detecting hrHPV was cross-compared in 200 cervical samples in our institution.
resultsThe global percentage of agreement between the 2 techniques was 95.0% (95%CI 92-98%) with a Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.85 (95%CI 0.75-0.94). Ten samples showed discordant results between the 2 techniques in both directions (5 HC2+/AF- and 5 HC2-/AF+). Among possible explanations for these discrepancies was the detection of HPV66 and HPV53 genotypes in two samples, since these genotypes are targeted by the Ampfire test but not by the HC2 test, as well as intrinsic differences in analytical performance to target specific genotypes.
conclusionsA high level of agreement was observed between the two techniques, which encourages further testing in order to definitively validate the use of the Ampfire kit for primary cervical cancer screening.
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.