To be acceptable for use in cervical cancer screening, a new assay that detects DNA of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) types must demonstrate high reproducibility and performance not inferior to that of a clinically validated HPV test. In the present study, a real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay targeting the E6 and E7 genes of hrHPV was compared with Hybrid Capture 2 (hc2) in a Belgian cervical cancer screening setting. In women >30 years old, the sensitivity and specificity for intraepithelial neoplasias of grade 2 or worse (93 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasias of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and 1,207 cases of no CIN or CIN1) were 93.6% and 95.6%, respectively, and those of hc2 were 83.9% and 94.5%, respectively {relative sensitivity of qPCR/hc2 = 1.12 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01 to 1.23]; relative specificity = 1.01 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.03]}. A score test showed that the sensitivity (P < 0.0001) and specificity (P < 0.0001) of the qPCR assay were not inferior to those of hc2 at the required thresholds of 90% and 98%, respectively. The overall agreement of hrHPV positivity between the two runs of the qPCR tests was 98.7% (95% CI, 97.5 to 99.4%), with a kappa value of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.83 to 1.00). The qPCR assay used in this study can be considered a reliable HPV assay that fulfills the clinical validation criteria defined for use in cervical cancer screening.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Depuydt et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: