Comparison of Human Papillomavirus genotyping by research vs. clinical assay for two self-collection devices.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Diane M Harper, Alisa P Young, Marie Claire O'Dwyer, Mutiya Olorunfemi, Anna Laurie, Ananda Sen, Dongru Chen, Leigh Morrison, Scott A Kelley, Anna McEvoy, Jill Schneiderhan, Pamela Rockwell, Philip Zazove, Jonathan Gabison, Jane E Chargot, Kristina Gallagher, Julie Prussack, Emma A Butcher, Martha L Alves, Elizabeth A Haro, Christelle El Khoury, Roger Smith, Natalie Saunders, Elizabeth Campbell, Heather M Walline
{"title":"Comparison of Human Papillomavirus genotyping by research vs. clinical assay for two self-collection devices.","authors":"Diane M Harper, Alisa P Young, Marie Claire O'Dwyer, Mutiya Olorunfemi, Anna Laurie, Ananda Sen, Dongru Chen, Leigh Morrison, Scott A Kelley, Anna McEvoy, Jill Schneiderhan, Pamela Rockwell, Philip Zazove, Jonathan Gabison, Jane E Chargot, Kristina Gallagher, Julie Prussack, Emma A Butcher, Martha L Alves, Elizabeth A Haro, Christelle El Khoury, Roger Smith, Natalie Saunders, Elizabeth Campbell, Heather M Walline","doi":"10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-25-0116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>HPV assays and self-collection devices for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection have evolved. We aim to compare two self-sampling devices against speculum-based testing for HPV genotype agreement and their accuracy for CIN2+ disease. Secondarily, we aim to compare two HPV assays for different HPV genotype detection agreement and their accuracy for CIN2+ disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Women from colposcopy (N=97) and primary care (N=96) were block randomized to two different self-sampling devices. Self-sampling and speculum-collected pairs of HPV specimens were analyzed with the research assay. A second speculum-collected specimen provided clinical results using the clinical HPV assay. Agreement (prevalence-based kappa) and accuracy (sensitivity/specificity ratios) provided the statistical comparison.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The two devices did not differ in their kappa agreement scores for overall HPV detection compared to the speculum collected sample (K=0.83 (0.72, 0.94) and Κ=0.90 (0.81,0.98), respectively, Exact McNemar's non-significant). The two devices did not differ in accuracy as measured by relative sensitivity/specificity for overall HPV at the CIN2+ disease threshold (1.0 (0.15, 6.77) and (1.19 (0.56, 2.54), respectively. The two assays did not differ in HPV agreement, nor assay accuracy for CIN2+ (n=10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HPV self-sampling devices robustly detected high-risk HPV types for cervical cancer screening when using the research assay to compare them. Both research and clinical HPV assays provide equivalent HPV detection for specific and aggregated HPV types Impact:This study provides a US-based population to show that self-collection for primary HPV testing is accurate for CIN2+ detection with multiple devices using a validated HPV assay.</p>","PeriodicalId":9458,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-25-0116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: HPV assays and self-collection devices for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection have evolved. We aim to compare two self-sampling devices against speculum-based testing for HPV genotype agreement and their accuracy for CIN2+ disease. Secondarily, we aim to compare two HPV assays for different HPV genotype detection agreement and their accuracy for CIN2+ disease.

Methods: Women from colposcopy (N=97) and primary care (N=96) were block randomized to two different self-sampling devices. Self-sampling and speculum-collected pairs of HPV specimens were analyzed with the research assay. A second speculum-collected specimen provided clinical results using the clinical HPV assay. Agreement (prevalence-based kappa) and accuracy (sensitivity/specificity ratios) provided the statistical comparison.

Results: The two devices did not differ in their kappa agreement scores for overall HPV detection compared to the speculum collected sample (K=0.83 (0.72, 0.94) and Κ=0.90 (0.81,0.98), respectively, Exact McNemar's non-significant). The two devices did not differ in accuracy as measured by relative sensitivity/specificity for overall HPV at the CIN2+ disease threshold (1.0 (0.15, 6.77) and (1.19 (0.56, 2.54), respectively. The two assays did not differ in HPV agreement, nor assay accuracy for CIN2+ (n=10).

Conclusions: HPV self-sampling devices robustly detected high-risk HPV types for cervical cancer screening when using the research assay to compare them. Both research and clinical HPV assays provide equivalent HPV detection for specific and aggregated HPV types Impact:This study provides a US-based population to show that self-collection for primary HPV testing is accurate for CIN2+ detection with multiple devices using a validated HPV assay.

两种自我采集装置的人乳头瘤病毒基因分型研究与临床比较。
背景:用于人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)检测的HPV检测方法和自收集装置已经发展。我们的目的是比较两种自采样装置与基于推测的HPV基因型一致性测试及其对CIN2+疾病的准确性。其次,我们的目的是比较两种HPV检测方法对不同HPV基因型的检测一致性及其对CIN2+疾病的准确性。方法:从阴道镜检查(N=97)和初级保健(N=96)的妇女被随机分组到两种不同的自采样装置。用研究方法对自采和镜采对HPV标本进行分析。第二个镜采集的标本使用临床HPV检测提供了临床结果。一致性(基于患病率的kappa)和准确性(敏感性/特异性比)提供了统计比较。结果:这两种装置在HPV检测的kappa一致性评分与镜腔收集的样本相比没有差异(K分别=0.83(0.72,0.94)和Κ=0.90 (0.81,0.98), Exact McNemar's无显著性)。在CIN2+疾病阈值(1.0(0.15,6.77)和(1.19(0.56,2.54))的总体HPV相对敏感性/特异性测量中,这两种装置的准确性没有差异。两种检测方法在HPV一致性和CIN2+检测准确性方面没有差异(n=10)。结论:HPV自采样装置强有力地检测出宫颈癌筛查的高危HPV类型,并使用研究方法进行比较。研究和临床HPV检测都为特定的和聚集的HPV类型提供了等效的HPV检测影响:本研究提供了一个基于美国的人群,表明使用多种设备使用经过验证的HPV检测方法进行原发性HPV检测的自我收集对于CIN2+检测是准确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.60%
发文量
538
审稿时长
1.6 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention publishes original peer-reviewed, population-based research on cancer etiology, prevention, surveillance, and survivorship. The following topics are of special interest: descriptive, analytical, and molecular epidemiology; biomarkers including assay development, validation, and application; chemoprevention and other types of prevention research in the context of descriptive and observational studies; the role of behavioral factors in cancer etiology and prevention; survivorship studies; risk factors; implementation science and cancer care delivery; and the science of cancer health disparities. Besides welcoming manuscripts that address individual subjects in any of the relevant disciplines, CEBP editors encourage the submission of manuscripts with a transdisciplinary approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信