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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |