Comparative performance of human papillomavirus DNA testing using novel sample collection methods

Julia C. Gage, Edward E. Partridge, Alfio Rausa, Patti E. Gravitt, Sholom Wacholder, Mark Schiffman, Isabel Scarinci, Philip E. Castle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To explore alternative cervical cancer screening approaches in an underserved population, we compared the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA assays in combination with different sample collection methods for primary cervical screening in the Mississippi Delta region. Three specimens were collected from women aged 26 to 65 years who were either routinely undergoing screening (n = 252) or not (n = 191): clinician-collected cervical specimens, clinician-collected cervicovaginal specimens, and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens taken at home. A novel collection device and medium were used for cervicovaginal sampling. Specimens were tested by three HPV DNA assays: hybrid capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen Corp., Gaithersburg, MD), Linear Array (LA; Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), and Amplicor (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA). Liquid-based cytology was performed on cervical specimens. We compared the overall positivity (a proxy for clinical specificity) for any carcinogenic HPV genotype and calculated the agreement across assay and specimen type using McNemar's test for differences in test positivity. Across all three assays there were no significant differences between clinician-collected and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens (P > 0.01 for all comparisons). For both cervicovaginal specimens (clinician collected and self-collected), fewer women tested positive by HC2 than by LA or Amplicor (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). HC2 had the best agreement between specimens for all assays. HC2 is likely more clinically specific, although possibly less sensitive, than either PCR test. Thus, use of HC2 on cervicovaginal specimens for screening could result in fewer referrals compared to LA and Amplicor.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4185-4189
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Clinical Microbiology
Volume49
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

DNA
Mississippi
Proxy
Vulnerable Populations
Early Detection of Cancer
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Cell Biology
Referral and Consultation
Genotype
Equipment and Supplies
Polymerase Chain Reaction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)

Cite this

Comparative performance of human papillomavirus DNA testing using novel sample collection methods. / Gage, Julia C.; Partridge, Edward E.; Rausa, Alfio; Gravitt, Patti E.; Wacholder, Sholom; Schiffman, Mark; Scarinci, Isabel; Castle, Philip E.

In: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Vol. 49, No. 12, 12.2011, p. 4185-4189.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gage, JC, Partridge, EE, Rausa, A, Gravitt, PE, Wacholder, S, Schiffman, M, Scarinci, I & Castle, PE 2011, 'Comparative performance of human papillomavirus DNA testing using novel sample collection methods', Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 49, no. 12, pp. 4185-4189. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01254-11
Gage, Julia C. ; Partridge, Edward E. ; Rausa, Alfio ; Gravitt, Patti E. ; Wacholder, Sholom ; Schiffman, Mark ; Scarinci, Isabel ; Castle, Philip E. / Comparative performance of human papillomavirus DNA testing using novel sample collection methods. In: Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2011 ; Vol. 49, No. 12. pp. 4185-4189.
@article{418fc88a5d1948108416f28b240e9924,
title = "Comparative performance of human papillomavirus DNA testing using novel sample collection methods",
abstract = "To explore alternative cervical cancer screening approaches in an underserved population, we compared the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA assays in combination with different sample collection methods for primary cervical screening in the Mississippi Delta region. Three specimens were collected from women aged 26 to 65 years who were either routinely undergoing screening (n = 252) or not (n = 191): clinician-collected cervical specimens, clinician-collected cervicovaginal specimens, and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens taken at home. A novel collection device and medium were used for cervicovaginal sampling. Specimens were tested by three HPV DNA assays: hybrid capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen Corp., Gaithersburg, MD), Linear Array (LA; Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), and Amplicor (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA). Liquid-based cytology was performed on cervical specimens. We compared the overall positivity (a proxy for clinical specificity) for any carcinogenic HPV genotype and calculated the agreement across assay and specimen type using McNemar's test for differences in test positivity. Across all three assays there were no significant differences between clinician-collected and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens (P > 0.01 for all comparisons). For both cervicovaginal specimens (clinician collected and self-collected), fewer women tested positive by HC2 than by LA or Amplicor (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). HC2 had the best agreement between specimens for all assays. HC2 is likely more clinically specific, although possibly less sensitive, than either PCR test. Thus, use of HC2 on cervicovaginal specimens for screening could result in fewer referrals compared to LA and Amplicor.",
author = "Gage, {Julia C.} and Partridge, {Edward E.} and Alfio Rausa and Gravitt, {Patti E.} and Sholom Wacholder and Mark Schiffman and Isabel Scarinci and Castle, {Philip E.}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1128/JCM.01254-11",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "49",
pages = "4185--4189",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Microbiology",
issn = "0095-1137",
publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative performance of human papillomavirus DNA testing using novel sample collection methods

AU - Gage, Julia C.

AU - Partridge, Edward E.

AU - Rausa, Alfio

AU - Gravitt, Patti E.

AU - Wacholder, Sholom

AU - Schiffman, Mark

AU - Scarinci, Isabel

AU - Castle, Philip E.

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - To explore alternative cervical cancer screening approaches in an underserved population, we compared the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA assays in combination with different sample collection methods for primary cervical screening in the Mississippi Delta region. Three specimens were collected from women aged 26 to 65 years who were either routinely undergoing screening (n = 252) or not (n = 191): clinician-collected cervical specimens, clinician-collected cervicovaginal specimens, and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens taken at home. A novel collection device and medium were used for cervicovaginal sampling. Specimens were tested by three HPV DNA assays: hybrid capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen Corp., Gaithersburg, MD), Linear Array (LA; Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), and Amplicor (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA). Liquid-based cytology was performed on cervical specimens. We compared the overall positivity (a proxy for clinical specificity) for any carcinogenic HPV genotype and calculated the agreement across assay and specimen type using McNemar's test for differences in test positivity. Across all three assays there were no significant differences between clinician-collected and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens (P > 0.01 for all comparisons). For both cervicovaginal specimens (clinician collected and self-collected), fewer women tested positive by HC2 than by LA or Amplicor (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). HC2 had the best agreement between specimens for all assays. HC2 is likely more clinically specific, although possibly less sensitive, than either PCR test. Thus, use of HC2 on cervicovaginal specimens for screening could result in fewer referrals compared to LA and Amplicor.

AB - To explore alternative cervical cancer screening approaches in an underserved population, we compared the performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA assays in combination with different sample collection methods for primary cervical screening in the Mississippi Delta region. Three specimens were collected from women aged 26 to 65 years who were either routinely undergoing screening (n = 252) or not (n = 191): clinician-collected cervical specimens, clinician-collected cervicovaginal specimens, and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens taken at home. A novel collection device and medium were used for cervicovaginal sampling. Specimens were tested by three HPV DNA assays: hybrid capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen Corp., Gaithersburg, MD), Linear Array (LA; Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), and Amplicor (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA). Liquid-based cytology was performed on cervical specimens. We compared the overall positivity (a proxy for clinical specificity) for any carcinogenic HPV genotype and calculated the agreement across assay and specimen type using McNemar's test for differences in test positivity. Across all three assays there were no significant differences between clinician-collected and self-collected cervicovaginal specimens (P > 0.01 for all comparisons). For both cervicovaginal specimens (clinician collected and self-collected), fewer women tested positive by HC2 than by LA or Amplicor (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). HC2 had the best agreement between specimens for all assays. HC2 is likely more clinically specific, although possibly less sensitive, than either PCR test. Thus, use of HC2 on cervicovaginal specimens for screening could result in fewer referrals compared to LA and Amplicor.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=82455174869&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=82455174869&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/JCM.01254-11

DO - 10.1128/JCM.01254-11

M3 - Article

VL - 49

SP - 4185

EP - 4189

JO - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

SN - 0095-1137

IS - 12

ER -