ArticleJCO global oncology2025
Improving the Sensitivity-Specificity Balance of Human Papillomavirus Testing on Self- and Clinician-Collected Samples in South Africa.
Article in JCO global oncology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeHuman papillomavirus (HPV) testing on self-collected samples may increase coverage of cervical cancer screening, but previous studies have observed lower specificity of HPV testing in self- versus clinician-collected samples. Here we investigate strategies to improve the sensitivity-specificity balance of a round of HPV testing on self-collected samples. MATERIALS AND
methodsWomen living with and without HIV, age 30-65 years, were recruited in South Africa. Self-collected vaginal samples and clinician-collected cervical samples were tested with Xpert HPV, an assay that detects the 14 high-risk HPV types in five separate channels: (P1) HPV 16; (P2) HPV 18, 45; (P3) HPV 31, 33, 35, 52, 58; (P4) HPV 51, 59; and (P5) HPV 39, 56, 66, 68. All women underwent colposcopy with histology sampling, and diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) was determined by adjudicated pathology. The AUC and related performance parameters were calculated using logistic regression with the cycle threshold (Ct) values of the channels as predictors.
resultsHPV prevalence in women without and with HIV was higher in self-collected (25.1%
conclusionUsing more stringent Ct cutoffs on the three channels that detect the eight highest-risk HPV types can improve the sensitivity-specificity balance of a round of screening in both self- and clinician-collected samples. Although performance of HPV testing on self-collected samples is excellent, performance parameters are better on clinician-collected samples.
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.