Comparison of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests

Julia C. Gage, Mark Sadorra, Brandon J. LaMere, Randi Kail, Carrie Aldrich, Walter Kinney, Barbara Fetterman, Thomas Lorey, Mark Schiffman, Philip E. Castle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test (cobas) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and identifies HPV16 and HPV18 separately as well as detecting a pool of 11 HR-HPV genotypes (HPV31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -68) and also HPV66. We compared cobas, Linear Array (LA), and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assays for detection of carcinogenic HPV DNA, and cobas and LA for detection of HPV16 and HPV18 DNA, among the first 1,852 women enrolled in the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort (PaP Cohort) study. Specimens were tested by all 3 assays 1 year after an HC2-positive result. In 1,824 specimens with cobas results, cobas had an 85.9% agreement with HC2 and 91.0% agreement with LA for carcinogenic HPV detection. When results between cobas and HC2 disagreed, cobas tended to call more women HPV positive (P < 0.01). Categorizing cobas and LA results hierarchically according to cancer risk (HPV16, HPV18, other carcinogenic HPV genotypes, or carcinogen negative), there was a 90% agreement for all categories of HPV (n = 1,824). We found good agreement between the two U.S. FDA-approved HPV tests, with discrepancies between the two assays due to specific characteristics of the individual assays. Additional studies are needed to compare HC2 and cobas for detecting and predicting CIN3 to understand the clinical implications of the discrepant test results between the two tests.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)61-65
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Clinical Microbiology
Volume50
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Human Papillomavirus DNA Tests
United States Food and Drug Administration
Genotype
Human papillomavirus 11
DNA
Carcinogens
Cohort Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)

Cite this

Comparison of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests. / Gage, Julia C.; Sadorra, Mark; LaMere, Brandon J.; Kail, Randi; Aldrich, Carrie; Kinney, Walter; Fetterman, Barbara; Lorey, Thomas; Schiffman, Mark; Castle, Philip E.

In: Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Vol. 50, No. 1, 01.2012, p. 61-65.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gage, JC, Sadorra, M, LaMere, BJ, Kail, R, Aldrich, C, Kinney, W, Fetterman, B, Lorey, T, Schiffman, M & Castle, PE 2012, 'Comparison of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests', Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 61-65. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.05989-11
Gage, Julia C. ; Sadorra, Mark ; LaMere, Brandon J. ; Kail, Randi ; Aldrich, Carrie ; Kinney, Walter ; Fetterman, Barbara ; Lorey, Thomas ; Schiffman, Mark ; Castle, Philip E. / Comparison of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests. In: Journal of Clinical Microbiology. 2012 ; Vol. 50, No. 1. pp. 61-65.
@article{cf3eaf3e660c4a12b6c2a92c0575945c,
title = "Comparison of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests",
abstract = "The cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test (cobas) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and identifies HPV16 and HPV18 separately as well as detecting a pool of 11 HR-HPV genotypes (HPV31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -68) and also HPV66. We compared cobas, Linear Array (LA), and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assays for detection of carcinogenic HPV DNA, and cobas and LA for detection of HPV16 and HPV18 DNA, among the first 1,852 women enrolled in the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort (PaP Cohort) study. Specimens were tested by all 3 assays 1 year after an HC2-positive result. In 1,824 specimens with cobas results, cobas had an 85.9{\%} agreement with HC2 and 91.0{\%} agreement with LA for carcinogenic HPV detection. When results between cobas and HC2 disagreed, cobas tended to call more women HPV positive (P < 0.01). Categorizing cobas and LA results hierarchically according to cancer risk (HPV16, HPV18, other carcinogenic HPV genotypes, or carcinogen negative), there was a 90{\%} agreement for all categories of HPV (n = 1,824). We found good agreement between the two U.S. FDA-approved HPV tests, with discrepancies between the two assays due to specific characteristics of the individual assays. Additional studies are needed to compare HC2 and cobas for detecting and predicting CIN3 to understand the clinical implications of the discrepant test results between the two tests.",
author = "Gage, {Julia C.} and Mark Sadorra and LaMere, {Brandon J.} and Randi Kail and Carrie Aldrich and Walter Kinney and Barbara Fetterman and Thomas Lorey and Mark Schiffman and Castle, {Philip E.}",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1128/JCM.05989-11",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "50",
pages = "61--65",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Microbiology",
issn = "0095-1137",
publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of the cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test with the hybrid capture 2 and linear array HPV DNA tests

AU - Gage, Julia C.

AU - Sadorra, Mark

AU - LaMere, Brandon J.

AU - Kail, Randi

AU - Aldrich, Carrie

AU - Kinney, Walter

AU - Fetterman, Barbara

AU - Lorey, Thomas

AU - Schiffman, Mark

AU - Castle, Philip E.

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - The cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test (cobas) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and identifies HPV16 and HPV18 separately as well as detecting a pool of 11 HR-HPV genotypes (HPV31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -68) and also HPV66. We compared cobas, Linear Array (LA), and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assays for detection of carcinogenic HPV DNA, and cobas and LA for detection of HPV16 and HPV18 DNA, among the first 1,852 women enrolled in the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort (PaP Cohort) study. Specimens were tested by all 3 assays 1 year after an HC2-positive result. In 1,824 specimens with cobas results, cobas had an 85.9% agreement with HC2 and 91.0% agreement with LA for carcinogenic HPV detection. When results between cobas and HC2 disagreed, cobas tended to call more women HPV positive (P < 0.01). Categorizing cobas and LA results hierarchically according to cancer risk (HPV16, HPV18, other carcinogenic HPV genotypes, or carcinogen negative), there was a 90% agreement for all categories of HPV (n = 1,824). We found good agreement between the two U.S. FDA-approved HPV tests, with discrepancies between the two assays due to specific characteristics of the individual assays. Additional studies are needed to compare HC2 and cobas for detecting and predicting CIN3 to understand the clinical implications of the discrepant test results between the two tests.

AB - The cobas human papillomavirus (HPV) test (cobas) was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and identifies HPV16 and HPV18 separately as well as detecting a pool of 11 HR-HPV genotypes (HPV31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -68) and also HPV66. We compared cobas, Linear Array (LA), and Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assays for detection of carcinogenic HPV DNA, and cobas and LA for detection of HPV16 and HPV18 DNA, among the first 1,852 women enrolled in the HPV Persistence and Progression Cohort (PaP Cohort) study. Specimens were tested by all 3 assays 1 year after an HC2-positive result. In 1,824 specimens with cobas results, cobas had an 85.9% agreement with HC2 and 91.0% agreement with LA for carcinogenic HPV detection. When results between cobas and HC2 disagreed, cobas tended to call more women HPV positive (P < 0.01). Categorizing cobas and LA results hierarchically according to cancer risk (HPV16, HPV18, other carcinogenic HPV genotypes, or carcinogen negative), there was a 90% agreement for all categories of HPV (n = 1,824). We found good agreement between the two U.S. FDA-approved HPV tests, with discrepancies between the two assays due to specific characteristics of the individual assays. Additional studies are needed to compare HC2 and cobas for detecting and predicting CIN3 to understand the clinical implications of the discrepant test results between the two tests.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84555196127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84555196127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/JCM.05989-11

DO - 10.1128/JCM.05989-11

M3 - Article

C2 - 22075592

AN - SCOPUS:84555196127

VL - 50

SP - 61

EP - 65

JO - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Microbiology

SN - 0095-1137

IS - 1

ER -