...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparison of Human Papillomavirus Detection by Aptima HPV and cobas HPV Tests in a Population of Women Referred for Colposcopy following Detection of Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance by Pap Cytology
【24h】

Comparison of Human Papillomavirus Detection by Aptima HPV and cobas HPV Tests in a Population of Women Referred for Colposcopy following Detection of Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance by Pap Cytology

机译:比较人乳头瘤病毒通过Aptima HPV和cobas HPV检测在通过宫颈细胞学检测出意义不明的非典型鳞状细胞后转诊接受阴道镜检查的女性人群中的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Few studies have compared the cobas HPV test to the Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) and the Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection, clinical performance in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe (CIN2+) diagnoses, and risk stratification by partial HPV genotyping. The cobas HPV test is a DNA test that separately and concurrently detects HPV16, HPV18, and a pool of 12 other hrHPV types. AHPV is an RNA test for a pool of 14 hrHPV genotypes, and AHPV GT is an RNA test run on AHPV-positive results to detect HPV16 separately from HPV18 and HPV45, which are detected together. In a population of patients (n = 988) referred for colposcopy because of a cervical Pap cytology result of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), a cervical scrape specimen was taken, placed into a ThinPrep Pap test vial containing PreservCyt liquid cytology medium, and tested in a blinded fashion with cobas and AHPV and with AHPV GT for AHPV-positive results. The final diagnoses were based on a consensus panel review of the biopsy specimen histology. AHPV and cobas were equally sensitive for CIN2+ diagnoses (89.4% each; P = 1.000), and AHPV was more specific than cobas (63.1% versus 59.3%; P ≤ 0.001). The percent total agreement, percent positive agreement, and kappa value were 90.9%, 81.1%, and 0.815, respectively. Risk stratification using partial HPV genotyping was similar for the two assays. AHPV and AHPV GT had similar sensitivity and risk stratification to cobas HPV, but they were more specific than cobas HPV.
机译:很少有研究将cobas HPV检测与Aptima HPV检测(AHPV)和Aptima HPV 16 18/45基因型检测(AHPV GT)进行高风险人乳头瘤病毒(hrHPV)检测,临床检测宫颈上皮内瘤变2级的临床性能进行比较(CIN2)或更严重(CIN2 +)的诊断,以及通过部分HPV基因分型的风险分层。 cobas HPV检测是一种DNA检测,可同时检测HPV16,HPV18和其他12种hrHPV类型。 AHPV是针对14个hrHPV基因型库的RNA测试,而AHPV GT是针对AHPV阳性结果运行的RNA测试,用于与HPV18和HPV45分开检测HPV16,这是一起检测到的。对于因意义不明的非典型鳞状细胞(ASC-US)进行子宫颈宫颈抹片细胞学检查而转诊为阴道镜的患者人群( n = 988),将子宫颈刮擦标本放入ThinPrep Pap测试瓶中装有PreservCyt液体细胞学培养基,并与cobas和AHPV以及AHPV GT以盲法测试了AHPV阳性结果。最终诊断基于对活检标本组织学的共识评估。 AHPV和cobas对CIN2 +诊断同样敏感(各为89.4%; P = 1.000),AHPV比cobas更具有特异性(63.1%对59.3%; P ≤0.001 )。总协议百分比,积极协议百分比和kappa值分别为90.9%,81.1%和0.815。两种检测使用部分HPV基因型进行的风险分层相似。 AHPV和AHPV GT与cobas HPV具有相似的敏感性和风险分层,但是它们比cobas HPV更具有特异性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号