Cargando…

Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection can be detected by using several molecular methods, including Hybrid-Capture II (HC2) assay and variable HPV DNA chip tests, although each method has different sensitivities and specificities. METHODS: We performed HPV 9G DNA Chip (9G) and PANArray HP...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jung, Ho Young, Han, Hye Seung, Kim, Hyo Bin, Oh, Seo Young, Lee, Sun-Joo, Kim, Wook Youn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Pathologists and the Korean Society for Cytopathology 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4804145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26763506
http://dx.doi.org/10.4132/jptm.2015.10.21
_version_ 1782422974025957376
author Jung, Ho Young
Han, Hye Seung
Kim, Hyo Bin
Oh, Seo Young
Lee, Sun-Joo
Kim, Wook Youn
author_facet Jung, Ho Young
Han, Hye Seung
Kim, Hyo Bin
Oh, Seo Young
Lee, Sun-Joo
Kim, Wook Youn
author_sort Jung, Ho Young
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection can be detected by using several molecular methods, including Hybrid-Capture II (HC2) assay and variable HPV DNA chip tests, although each method has different sensitivities and specificities. METHODS: We performed HPV 9G DNA Chip (9G) and PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip (PANArray) tests on 118 cervicovaginal swabs and compared the results with HC2, cytology, histology, and direct sequencing results. RESULTS: The overall and high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) positivity rates were 62.7% and 44.9% using 9G, and 61.0% and 30.5% using PANArray, respectively. The positivity rates for HR-HPV with these two chips were significantly lower than 55.1% when HC2 was used. The sensitivity of overall HPV positivity in detecting histologically confirmed low-grade cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions or higher was 88.7% for all three tests. The specificity was 58.5% for 9G and 61.5% for PANArray, which was significantly lower than the 72.3% for HC2. With the HR-HPV(+) genotype threshold, the sensitivity decreased to 75.5% for 9G and 52.8% for PANArray, which was significantly lower than the 88.7% for HC2. Comparison of the two chips showed concordant results in 55.1% of the samples, compatible results in 16.9%, and discordant results in 28.0%, exhibiting poor agreement in detecting  certain HPV genotypes. Compared with direct sequencing, 9G yielded no discordant results, whereas PANArray yielded 31 discordant results (26.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with HC2, the HPV genotyping tests showed lower sensitivity in histologic correlation. When the two chips were compared, the 9G was more sensitive and accurate for detecting HR-HPV than the PANArray.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4804145
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Korean Society of Pathologists and the Korean Society for Cytopathology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48041452016-03-24 Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs Jung, Ho Young Han, Hye Seung Kim, Hyo Bin Oh, Seo Young Lee, Sun-Joo Kim, Wook Youn J Pathol Transl Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection can be detected by using several molecular methods, including Hybrid-Capture II (HC2) assay and variable HPV DNA chip tests, although each method has different sensitivities and specificities. METHODS: We performed HPV 9G DNA Chip (9G) and PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip (PANArray) tests on 118 cervicovaginal swabs and compared the results with HC2, cytology, histology, and direct sequencing results. RESULTS: The overall and high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) positivity rates were 62.7% and 44.9% using 9G, and 61.0% and 30.5% using PANArray, respectively. The positivity rates for HR-HPV with these two chips were significantly lower than 55.1% when HC2 was used. The sensitivity of overall HPV positivity in detecting histologically confirmed low-grade cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions or higher was 88.7% for all three tests. The specificity was 58.5% for 9G and 61.5% for PANArray, which was significantly lower than the 72.3% for HC2. With the HR-HPV(+) genotype threshold, the sensitivity decreased to 75.5% for 9G and 52.8% for PANArray, which was significantly lower than the 88.7% for HC2. Comparison of the two chips showed concordant results in 55.1% of the samples, compatible results in 16.9%, and discordant results in 28.0%, exhibiting poor agreement in detecting  certain HPV genotypes. Compared with direct sequencing, 9G yielded no discordant results, whereas PANArray yielded 31 discordant results (26.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with HC2, the HPV genotyping tests showed lower sensitivity in histologic correlation. When the two chips were compared, the 9G was more sensitive and accurate for detecting HR-HPV than the PANArray. The Korean Society of Pathologists and the Korean Society for Cytopathology 2016-03 2016-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4804145/ /pubmed/26763506 http://dx.doi.org/10.4132/jptm.2015.10.21 Text en © 2016 The Korean Society of Pathologists/The Korean Society for Cytopathology This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Jung, Ho Young
Han, Hye Seung
Kim, Hyo Bin
Oh, Seo Young
Lee, Sun-Joo
Kim, Wook Youn
Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs
title Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs
title_full Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs
title_fullStr Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs
title_short Comparison of Analytical and Clinical Performance of HPV 9G DNA Chip, PANArray HPV Genotyping Chip, and Hybrid-Capture II Assay in Cervicovaginal Swabs
title_sort comparison of analytical and clinical performance of hpv 9g dna chip, panarray hpv genotyping chip, and hybrid-capture ii assay in cervicovaginal swabs
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4804145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26763506
http://dx.doi.org/10.4132/jptm.2015.10.21
work_keys_str_mv AT junghoyoung comparisonofanalyticalandclinicalperformanceofhpv9gdnachippanarrayhpvgenotypingchipandhybridcaptureiiassayincervicovaginalswabs
AT hanhyeseung comparisonofanalyticalandclinicalperformanceofhpv9gdnachippanarrayhpvgenotypingchipandhybridcaptureiiassayincervicovaginalswabs
AT kimhyobin comparisonofanalyticalandclinicalperformanceofhpv9gdnachippanarrayhpvgenotypingchipandhybridcaptureiiassayincervicovaginalswabs
AT ohseoyoung comparisonofanalyticalandclinicalperformanceofhpv9gdnachippanarrayhpvgenotypingchipandhybridcaptureiiassayincervicovaginalswabs
AT leesunjoo comparisonofanalyticalandclinicalperformanceofhpv9gdnachippanarrayhpvgenotypingchipandhybridcaptureiiassayincervicovaginalswabs
AT kimwookyoun comparisonofanalyticalandclinicalperformanceofhpv9gdnachippanarrayhpvgenotypingchipandhybridcaptureiiassayincervicovaginalswabs