We have located links that may give you full text access.
Impact of high-performance HPV testing to improve cervical cancer screening in China: A prospective population-based multicenter cohort study.
Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2024 April 9
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical performance of HBRT-H14, a real-time PCR-based assay that separates human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and HPV18 from 12 other high-risk (HR) HPV types, in population according to Chinese guideline.
METHODS: 9829 eligible women aged 21-64 years from Henan, Shanxi and Guangdong provinces were performed by HBRT-H14 testing and liquid-based cytology (LBC) screening at baseline and followed up for three-year. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (absolute risk), and negative predictive value of LBC diagnosis and HPV testing were calculated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) Lesions.
RESULTS: At baseline, 80 (0.81%) participants were diagnosed with CIN2+. HR-HPV with reflex LBC had a significantly higher sensitivity (78/80, 97.50% [95% CI: 91.34-99.31%] vs. 62/80, 77.50% [67.21-85.27%], PMcNemar <0.001), and a slightly lower specificity (8528/9749, 87.48% [86.80-88.12%] vs. 8900/9749, 91.29% [90.72-91.83%], PMcNemar <0.001) than LBC with reflex HR-HPV for CIN2+. 7832 (79.6%) participants completed 3-year follow-up and 172 (2.20%) participants were cumulatively diagnosed with CIN2+. Compared with LBC with reflex HR-HPV, HR-HPV with reflex LBC significantly increased the sensitivity (161/172, 93.60% [88.91-96.39%] vs. 87/172, 50.58% [43.18-57.96%], PMcNemar <0.001), but marginally decreased the specificity (6776/7660, 88.46% [87.72-89.16%] vs. 6933/7660, 90.51% [89.83-91.15], PMcNemar <0.001). In addition, the absolute three-year risk of CIN2+ in HPV16/18-positive individuals was as high as 33% (80/238), while the risk in the HPV-negative population was only 0.16% (11/6787), much lower than those in the negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM) population (1.21%, 85/7018). Moreover, similar results were found in women ≥ 30 years old.
CONCLUSIONS: The study has indicated that HBRT-14 has a reliable clinical performance for use in cervical screening. The validated HPV test would improve the quality of population screening.
METHODS: 9829 eligible women aged 21-64 years from Henan, Shanxi and Guangdong provinces were performed by HBRT-H14 testing and liquid-based cytology (LBC) screening at baseline and followed up for three-year. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (absolute risk), and negative predictive value of LBC diagnosis and HPV testing were calculated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) Lesions.
RESULTS: At baseline, 80 (0.81%) participants were diagnosed with CIN2+. HR-HPV with reflex LBC had a significantly higher sensitivity (78/80, 97.50% [95% CI: 91.34-99.31%] vs. 62/80, 77.50% [67.21-85.27%], PMcNemar <0.001), and a slightly lower specificity (8528/9749, 87.48% [86.80-88.12%] vs. 8900/9749, 91.29% [90.72-91.83%], PMcNemar <0.001) than LBC with reflex HR-HPV for CIN2+. 7832 (79.6%) participants completed 3-year follow-up and 172 (2.20%) participants were cumulatively diagnosed with CIN2+. Compared with LBC with reflex HR-HPV, HR-HPV with reflex LBC significantly increased the sensitivity (161/172, 93.60% [88.91-96.39%] vs. 87/172, 50.58% [43.18-57.96%], PMcNemar <0.001), but marginally decreased the specificity (6776/7660, 88.46% [87.72-89.16%] vs. 6933/7660, 90.51% [89.83-91.15], PMcNemar <0.001). In addition, the absolute three-year risk of CIN2+ in HPV16/18-positive individuals was as high as 33% (80/238), while the risk in the HPV-negative population was only 0.16% (11/6787), much lower than those in the negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM) population (1.21%, 85/7018). Moreover, similar results were found in women ≥ 30 years old.
CONCLUSIONS: The study has indicated that HBRT-14 has a reliable clinical performance for use in cervical screening. The validated HPV test would improve the quality of population screening.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app