(1) Background: Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are known to be related to the development of about 5% of all human cancers. The clinical relevance of HPV infection has been deeply investigated in carcinomas of the oropharyngeal area, uterine cervix, and anogenital area. To date, several different methods have been used for detecting HPV infection. The aim of the present study was to compare three different methods for the diagnosis of the presence of the HPV genome. (2) Methods: A total of 50 samples were analyzed. Twenty-five of them were tested using both next generation sequencing (NGS) and VisionArray® technology, the other 25 were tested using Hybrid Capture (HC) II assay and VisionArray® technology. (3) Results: A substantial agreement was obtained using NGS and VisionArray® (κ = 0.802), as well as between HC II and VisionArray® (κ = 0.606). In both analyses, the concordance increased if only high risk HPVs I(HR-HPVs) were considered as “positive”. (4) Conclusions: Our data highlighted the importance of technical choice in HPV characterization, which should be guided by the clinical aims, costs, starting material, and turnaround time for results.
Different Methods in HPV Genotyping of Anogenital and Oropharyngeal Lesions: Comparison between VisionArray® Technology, Next Generation Sequencing, and Hybrid Capture Assay
