scholarly journals HPV testing for cervical cancer screening: technical improvement of laboratory logistics and good clinical performance of the cobas 6800 in comparison to the 4800 system

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Frayle ◽  
Silvia Gori ◽  
Martina Rizzi ◽  
Bianca Nives Graziani ◽  
Elisa Vian ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (12) ◽  
pp. 3544-3551 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. J. Polman ◽  
A. Oštrbenk ◽  
L. Xu ◽  
P. J. F. Snijders ◽  
C. J. L. M. Meijer ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTHuman papillomavirus (HPV) testing is increasingly being incorporated into cervical cancer screening. The Validation of HPV Genotyping Tests (VALGENT) is a framework designed to evaluate the clinical performance of various HPV tests relative to that of the validated and accepted comparator test in a formalized and uniform manner. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of the HPV-Risk assay with samples from the VALGENT-3 panel and to compare its performance to that of the clinically validated Hybrid Capture 2 assay (HC2). The VALGENT-3 panel comprises 1,300 consecutive samples from women participating in routine cervical cancer screening and is enriched with 300 samples from women with abnormal cytology. DNA was extracted from original ThinPrep PreservCyt medium aliquots, and HPV testing was performed using the HPV-Risk assay by investigators blind to the clinical data. HPV prevalence was analyzed, and the clinical performance of the HPV-Risk assay for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) and CIN2 or worse (CIN2+) relative to the performance of HC2 was assessed. The sensitivity of the HPV-Risk assay for the detection of CIN3+ was similar to that of HC2 (relative sensitivity, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.05;P= 1.000), but the specificity of the HPV-Risk assay was significantly higher than that of HC2 (relative specificity, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.04;P< 0.001). For the detection of CIN2+, similar results were obtained, with the relative sensitivity being 0.98 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.02;P= 0.257) and the relative specificity being 1.02 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.03;P< 0.001). The performance of the HPV-Risk assay for the detection of CIN3+ and CIN2+ was noninferior to that of HC2, with allPvalues being ≤0.006. In conclusion, the HPV-Risk assay demonstrated noninferiority to the clinically validated HC2 by the use of samples from the VALGENT-3 panel for test validation and comparison.


2020 ◽  
Vol Volume 12 ◽  
pp. 203-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise T Thomsen ◽  
Susanne K Kjær ◽  
Christian Munk ◽  
Kirsten Frederiksen ◽  
Dorthe Ørnskov ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 136 (6) ◽  
pp. E743-E750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Marie Tebeu ◽  
Joël Fokom-Domgue ◽  
Victoria Crofts ◽  
Emmanuel Flahaut ◽  
Rosa Catarino ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 138 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bari Laskow ◽  
Ruben Figueroa ◽  
Karla M. Alfaro ◽  
Isabel C. Scarinci ◽  
Elizabeth Conlisk ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 233339361878363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brianne Wood ◽  
Virginia L. Russell ◽  
Ziad El-Khatib ◽  
Susan McFaul ◽  
Monica Taljaard ◽  
...  

In this study, we examine from multiple perspectives, women’s shared decision-making needs when considering cervical screening options: Pap testing, in-clinic human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, self-collected HPV testing, or no screening. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework guided the development of the interview schedule. We conducted semi-structured interviews with seven screen-eligible women and five health care professionals (three health care providers and two health system managers). Women did not perceive that cervical screening involves a “decision,” which limited their knowledge of options, risks, and benefits. Women and health professionals emphasized how a trusted primary care provider can support women making a choice among cervical screening modalities. Having all cervical screening options recommended and funded was perceived as an important step to facilitate shared decision making. Supporting women in making preference-based decisions in cervical cancer screening may increase screening among those who do not undergo screening regularly and decrease uptake in women who are over-screened.


2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 1136-1144
Author(s):  
Kofi Effah ◽  
Joseph Emmanuel Amuah ◽  
Priscilla Dunyo ◽  
Gladys Akwada ◽  
Yusra Kalmoni ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (S5) ◽  
pp. S993-S999
Author(s):  
Donna L. Williams ◽  
Michael Hagensee ◽  
Ruijuan Gao ◽  
Danny Barnhill ◽  
Elizabeth T. H. Fontham

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document