首页> 外文OA文献 >Comparison of GP5+/6+-PCR and SPF10-line blot assays for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus in samples from women with normal cytology results who develop grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
【2h】

Comparison of GP5+/6+-PCR and SPF10-line blot assays for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus in samples from women with normal cytology results who develop grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

机译:GP5 + / 6 + -PCR和SPF10-line印迹检测法在检测细胞学结果正常,发展为3级宫颈上皮内瘤变的女性样本中检测高危人乳头瘤病毒的比较。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Using a case control approach, we performed a two-way comparison study between GP5+/6+-PCR and HPV SPF(10)-Line Blot 25 (SPF(10)) assays for detection of 14 types of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) in samples from women with normal cytology results who had or developed grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 3). Samples were pooled from two cohorts, i.e., women participating in population-based screening and women attending a gynecological outpatient clinic. Cases (n = 45) were women with histologically confirmed CIN 3 diagnosed within a median follow-up time of 2.7 (range, 0.2 to 7.9) years. Control samples were from women (n = 264) who had developed CIN 1 lesions at maximum (median follow-up at 5.8 [range, 0 to 10] years). Identical numbers of cases tested positive for 1 or more of the 14 hrHPV types by both systems (40/45; McNemar; P = 1.0). Conversely, SPF(10) scored significantly more controls as hrHPV positive than did GP5+/6+-PCR (95/264 versus 29/264; McNemar; P 0.001). Consequently, women with normal cytology results and an hrHPV GP5+/6+-PCR-positive test exhibited a risk of CIN 3 that was 4.5 times higher (odds ratio [OR], 65; 95% confidence interval [95%CI], 24 to 178) than that seen for women with an hrHPV-positive SPF(10) test (OR, 14; 95%CI, 5 to 38)). Similar results were obtained after analysis of both cohorts separately. Discrepancy analysis by viral load assessment for the most common discordant hrHPV types (HPV16, -18, and -52) showed that samples which were SPF(10) positive only for these types had viral loads significantly lower than those for samples that were positive by both assays (analysis of variance; P or = 0.006). Our data indicate that GP5+/6+-PCR has a better clinical performance than SPF(10) for women who are diagnosed with CIN 3 after prior normal cytology results. The extra positivity scored by SPF(10) mainly involved infections characterized by low viral loads that do not result in CIN 3.
机译:使用病例对照方法,我们在GP5 + / 6 + -PCR和HPV SPF(10)-Line Blot 25(SPF(10))分析之间进行了双向比较研究,以检测14种高危型人乳头瘤病毒(细胞学检查结果正常的女性样本中,有或发生过3级宫颈上皮内瘤变(CIN 3)。从两个队列(即参加基于人群的筛查的妇女和妇科门诊的妇女)的样本中收集样本。病例(n = 45)是经组织学证实为CIN 3的女性,平均随访时间为2.7年(0.2至7.9年)。对照样本来自最大发展为CIN 1病变的女性(n = 264)(中位随访时间为5.8 [范围,0至10]年)。两个系统对14种hrHPV类型中的1种或多种测试为阳性的病例数相同(40/45; McNemar; P = 1.0)。相反,作为hrHPV阳性,SPF(10)的得分明显高于GP5 + / 6 + -PCR(95/264对29/264; McNemar; P <0.001)。因此,细胞学检查结果正常且hrHPV GP5 + / 6 + -PCR阳性的女性,其CIN 3风险高4.5倍(几率[OR]为65; 95%置信区间[95%CI]为24)高于hrHPV阳性SPF(10)测试的女性(OR,14; 95%CI,5至38))。对两个队列分别进行分析后,获得了相似的结果。通过病毒载量评估对最常见的不一致hrHPV类型(HPV16,-18和-52)进行的差异分析表明,仅对这些类型的SPF(10)呈阳性的样品的病毒载量明显低于对两种检测(方差分析; P <或= 0.006)。我们的数据表明,对于先前经过正常细胞学检查后被诊断为CIN 3的女性,GP5 + / 6 + -PCR具有比SPF(10)更好的临床表现。 SPF(10)得出的额外阳性结果主要涉及病毒载量低但不会导致CIN 3的感染。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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