...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Cross-Sectional Comparison of an Automated Hybrid Capture 2 Assay and the Consensus GP5+/6+ PCR Method in a Population-Based Cervical Screening Program
【24h】

Cross-Sectional Comparison of an Automated Hybrid Capture 2 Assay and the Consensus GP5+/6+ PCR Method in a Population-Based Cervical Screening Program

机译:在基于人群的宫颈筛查程序中,自动杂交捕获2分析和共识GP5 + / 6 + PCR方法的截面比较

获取原文
           

摘要

In this cross-sectional study, clinical performances of the hybrid capture 2 assay using an automated instrument (i.e., rapid capture system) (hc2-RCS) and the high-risk human papillomavirus GP5+/6+ PCR-enzyme immunoassay (EIA) test were compared using cervical scrape specimens from 8,132 women that participated in a population-based screening trial. The hc2-RCS test scored significantly more samples positive (6.8%) than the GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA (4.8%) (P < 0.0005). This could be attributed largely to a higher positivity rate by the hc2-RCS test for women with cytologically normal, borderline, or mild dyskaryosis. A receiver operator characteristics analysis of the semiquantitative hc2-RCS results in relation to different cytology categories revealed that these differences are owing to differences in assay thresholds. For women classified as having moderate dyskaryosis or worse who also had underlying histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or cervical cancer (≥CIN3), the hc2-RCS scored 97% (31/32) of samples positive, versus 91% (29/32) by GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA. However, this difference was not significant (P = 0.25). After increasing the hc2-RCS cutoff from 1.0 to 2.0 relative light units/cutoff value of the HPV16 calibrator (RLU/CO), no additional CIN3 lesions were missed by hc2-RCS, but the number of test-positive women with normal, borderline, or mild dyskaryosis was significantly decreased (P < 0.0005). However, at this RLU/CO, the difference in test positivity between hc2-RCS and the GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA was still significant (P = 0.02). The use of an RLU/CO value of 3.0 revealed no significant difference between hc2-RCS and GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA results, and equal numbers of smears classified as ≥CIN3 (i.e., 29/32) were detected by both methods. In summary, both assays perform very well for the detection of ≥CIN3 in a population-based cervical screening setting. However, adjustment of the hc2-RCS threshold to an RLU/CO value of 2.0 or 3.0 seems to produce an improved balance between the clinical sensitivity and specificity for ≥CIN3 in population-based cervical screening.
机译:在这项横断面研究中,使用自动仪器(即快速捕获系统)(hc2-RCS)和高风险人乳头瘤病毒GP5 + / 6 + PCR酶免疫测定(EIA)测试进行混合捕获2测定的临床表现使用参与基于人群的筛查试验的8132名妇女的宫颈刮擦样本对这些样本进行了比较。 hc2-RCS测试的阳性样本(6.8%)明显高于GP5 + / 6 + PCR-EIA(4.8%)( P <0.0005)。 hc2-RCS检测可将这主要归因于细胞学正常,边缘性或轻度运动障碍的女性的hc2-RCS测试阳性率较高。与不同细胞学类别有关的半定量hc2-RCS结果的接收者操作者特征分析表明,这些差异是由于测定阈值的差异所致。对于被分类为中度涡旋病或更严重的妇女,并且在组织学上也证实了潜在的宫颈上皮内瘤变3级或宫颈癌(≥CIN3),hc2-RCS阳性样本的得分为97%(31/32),而91%(29/29) 32)通过GP5 + / 6 + PCR-EIA。但是,这种差异并不明显( P = 0.25)。在将hc2-RCS截止值从HPV16校准器的相对光单位/截止值(1.0 / 2.0)增加到1.0到2.0的相对光单位/截止值后,hc2-RCS不会错过其他CIN3病变,但是正常,处于交界处的测试阳性妇女的数量,或轻度运动障碍明显减少( P <0.0005)。但是,在此RLU / CO下,hc2-RCS和GP5 + / 6 + PCR-EIA的测试阳性率差异仍然很大( P = 0.02)。 RLU / CO值3.0的使用显示hc2-RCS和GP5 + / 6 + PCR-EIA结果之间无显着差异,并且两种方法均检测到相等数量的涂片≥CIN3(即29/32)。总而言之,在基于人群的宫颈筛查中,两种检测方法对于检测≥CIN3均表现良好。但是,将hc2-RCS阈值调整为RLU / CO值为2.0或3.0似乎可以在基于人群的宫颈筛查中,对≥CIN3的临床敏感性和特异性之间产生更好的平衡。

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