Comparison of human papillomavirus detection by Aptima HPV and cobas HPV tests in a population of women referred for colposcopy following detection of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance by Pap cytology

Philip E. Castle, Barbara Eaton, Jennifer Reid, Damon Getman, Janel Dockter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Few studies have compared the cobas HPV test to the Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) and the Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection, clinical performance in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe (CIN2+) diagnoses, and risk stratification by partial HPV genotyping. The cobas HPV test is a DNA test that separately and concurrently detects HPV16, HPV18, and a pool of 12 other hrHPV types. AHPV is an RNA test for a pool of 14 hrHPV genotypes, and AHPV GT is an RNA test run on AHPV-positive results to detect HPV16 separately from HPV18 and HPV45, which are detected together. In a population of patients (n = 988) referred for colposcopy because of a cervical Pap cytology result of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), a cervical scrape specimen was taken, placed into a ThinPrep Pap test vial containing PreservCyt liquid cytology medium, and tested in a blinded fashion with cobas and AHPV and with AHPV GT for AHPV-positive results. The final diagnoses were based on a consensus panel review of the biopsy specimen histology. AHPV and cobas were equally sensitive for CIN2+ diagnoses (89.4% each; P = 1.000), and AHPV was more specific than cobas (63.1% versus 59.3%; P ≤ 0.001). The percent total agreement, percent positive agreement, and kappa value were 90.9%, 81.1%, and 0.815, respectively. Risk stratification using partial HPV genotyping was similar for the two assays. AHPV and AHPV GT had similar sensitivity and risk stratification to cobas HPV, but they were more specific than cobas HPV.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1277-1281
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Clinical Microbiology
Volume53
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2015

Fingerprint

Colposcopy
Cell Biology
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Population
Genotype
RNA
Papanicolaou Test
Human papillomavirus 18
Human papillomavirus 16
Atypical Squamous Cells of the Cervix
Histology
Biopsy
DNA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)

Cite this

@article{517f817839094fc79f479d1f69b47bb7,
title = "Comparison of human papillomavirus detection by Aptima HPV and cobas HPV tests in a population of women referred for colposcopy following detection of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance by Pap cytology",
abstract = "Few studies have compared the cobas HPV test to the Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) and the Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection, clinical performance in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe (CIN2+) diagnoses, and risk stratification by partial HPV genotyping. The cobas HPV test is a DNA test that separately and concurrently detects HPV16, HPV18, and a pool of 12 other hrHPV types. AHPV is an RNA test for a pool of 14 hrHPV genotypes, and AHPV GT is an RNA test run on AHPV-positive results to detect HPV16 separately from HPV18 and HPV45, which are detected together. In a population of patients (n = 988) referred for colposcopy because of a cervical Pap cytology result of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), a cervical scrape specimen was taken, placed into a ThinPrep Pap test vial containing PreservCyt liquid cytology medium, and tested in a blinded fashion with cobas and AHPV and with AHPV GT for AHPV-positive results. The final diagnoses were based on a consensus panel review of the biopsy specimen histology. AHPV and cobas were equally sensitive for CIN2+ diagnoses (89.4{\%} each; P = 1.000), and AHPV was more specific than cobas (63.1{\%} versus 59.3{\%}; P ≤ 0.001). The percent total agreement, percent positive agreement, and kappa value were 90.9{\%}, 81.1{\%}, and 0.815, respectively. Risk stratification using partial HPV genotyping was similar for the two assays. AHPV and AHPV GT had similar sensitivity and risk stratification to cobas HPV, but they were more specific than cobas HPV.",
author = "Castle, {Philip E.} and Barbara Eaton and Jennifer Reid and Damon Getman and Janel Dockter",
year = "2015",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1128/JCM.03558-14",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "53",
pages = "1277--1281",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Microbiology",
issn = "0095-1137",
publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of human papillomavirus detection by Aptima HPV and cobas HPV tests in a population of women referred for colposcopy following detection of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance by Pap cytology

AU - Castle, Philip E.

AU - Eaton, Barbara

AU - Reid, Jennifer

AU - Getman, Damon

AU - Dockter, Janel

PY - 2015/4/1

Y1 - 2015/4/1

N2 - Few studies have compared the cobas HPV test to the Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) and the Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection, clinical performance in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe (CIN2+) diagnoses, and risk stratification by partial HPV genotyping. The cobas HPV test is a DNA test that separately and concurrently detects HPV16, HPV18, and a pool of 12 other hrHPV types. AHPV is an RNA test for a pool of 14 hrHPV genotypes, and AHPV GT is an RNA test run on AHPV-positive results to detect HPV16 separately from HPV18 and HPV45, which are detected together. In a population of patients (n = 988) referred for colposcopy because of a cervical Pap cytology result of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), a cervical scrape specimen was taken, placed into a ThinPrep Pap test vial containing PreservCyt liquid cytology medium, and tested in a blinded fashion with cobas and AHPV and with AHPV GT for AHPV-positive results. The final diagnoses were based on a consensus panel review of the biopsy specimen histology. AHPV and cobas were equally sensitive for CIN2+ diagnoses (89.4% each; P = 1.000), and AHPV was more specific than cobas (63.1% versus 59.3%; P ≤ 0.001). The percent total agreement, percent positive agreement, and kappa value were 90.9%, 81.1%, and 0.815, respectively. Risk stratification using partial HPV genotyping was similar for the two assays. AHPV and AHPV GT had similar sensitivity and risk stratification to cobas HPV, but they were more specific than cobas HPV.

AB - Few studies have compared the cobas HPV test to the Aptima HPV assay (AHPV) and the Aptima HPV 16 18/45 genotype assay (AHPV GT) for high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) detection, clinical performance in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) or more severe (CIN2+) diagnoses, and risk stratification by partial HPV genotyping. The cobas HPV test is a DNA test that separately and concurrently detects HPV16, HPV18, and a pool of 12 other hrHPV types. AHPV is an RNA test for a pool of 14 hrHPV genotypes, and AHPV GT is an RNA test run on AHPV-positive results to detect HPV16 separately from HPV18 and HPV45, which are detected together. In a population of patients (n = 988) referred for colposcopy because of a cervical Pap cytology result of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US), a cervical scrape specimen was taken, placed into a ThinPrep Pap test vial containing PreservCyt liquid cytology medium, and tested in a blinded fashion with cobas and AHPV and with AHPV GT for AHPV-positive results. The final diagnoses were based on a consensus panel review of the biopsy specimen histology. AHPV and cobas were equally sensitive for CIN2+ diagnoses (89.4% each; P = 1.000), and AHPV was more specific than cobas (63.1% versus 59.3%; P ≤ 0.001). The percent total agreement, percent positive agreement, and kappa value were 90.9%, 81.1%, and 0.815, respectively. Risk stratification using partial HPV genotyping was similar for the two assays. AHPV and AHPV GT had similar sensitivity and risk stratification to cobas HPV, but they were more specific than cobas HPV.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925252131&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84925252131&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/JCM.03558-14

DO - 10.1128/JCM.03558-14

M3 - Article

VL - 53

SP - 1277

EP - 1281

JO - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

SN - 0095-1137

IS - 4

ER -