ArticleInternational journal of women's health2025
Operational Feasibility and Performance of mRPA Versus PCR for the Detection of HPV Types 16, 18, and 52 in Clinical Samples: An Exploratory Study.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This exploratory study investigates the feasibility and performance of multiplex Recombinase Polymerase Amplification (mRPA) compared to conventional Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for the detection and genotyping of high-risk Human Papillomavirus (HPV) types 16, 18, and 52. Current PCR methods are widely used for HPV detection but are limited by the need for complex thermal cycling equipment and lengthy processing times, which restrict their use in low-resource settings. This study aims to evaluate whether mRPA can serve as a faster, simpler, and more accessible alternative for HPV screening in primary healthcare environments. Methods: A total of 20 clinical samples from cervical swabs were tested using both mRPA and conventional PCR. The samples were preserved in ThinPrep Results: The mRPA demonstrated sensitivity and specificity that were lower than PCR, with detection rates of 100% for HPV 16, 80% for HPV 18, and 60% for HPV 52, compared to PCR's 100% across all types. Overall, mRPA achieved an overall sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 100%. However, mRPA significantly reduced the amplification time to 30 minutes and eliminated the need for thermal cyclers, highlighting its potential suitability for primary healthcare settings. The practical implications of mRPA's rapid turnaround time and simplified equipment requirements make it a promising tool for point-of-care applications in resource-limited environments. Conclusion: The findings suggest that mRPA could serve as a viable alternative to conventional PCR for HPV genotyping, offering advantages in speed and simplicity. Although mRPA's diagnostic performance was lower than PCR, its operational benefits make it particularly suitable for use in resource-limited settings. Future research should focus on further optimization and validation to enhance mRPA's diagnostic accuracy and explore its integration with user-friendly detection platforms.
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.