2016
DOI: 10.4238/gmr.15027896
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of novel assays for the detection of human papilloma virus in self-collected samples for cervical cancer screening

Abstract: ABSTRACT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of three new high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) assays for primary cervical cancer screening, by using self-collected samples, and to identify an HPV assay that could overcome the major obstacles faced during large-scale population-based screening. Two hundred and ten women showing abnormal cervical cytology (and referred for a colposcopy) were recruited in this study. Self-collected samples obtained from all women were tested with the Cobas, Se… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our study shows that BMRT-HPV, as the primary screening algorithm for cervical cancer, has similar sensitivity to Cobas, which is similar to the result of the Chen's study [17] This suggests BMRT is worthy of clinical promotion as a primary screening assay for cervical cancer.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Our study shows that BMRT-HPV, as the primary screening algorithm for cervical cancer, has similar sensitivity to Cobas, which is similar to the result of the Chen's study [17] This suggests BMRT is worthy of clinical promotion as a primary screening assay for cervical cancer.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…The most likely explanation for the slight difference in sensitivity is that a sample obtained by vaginal self-sampling contains fewer representative cells for diagnosis than a sample obtained by clinician-based cervical sampling as reflected by the difference in mean Ct levels in CIN3+ cases. This is supported by diagnostic studies with Cobas PCR testing showing relative sensitivities for CIN3+ between 0·92 and 0·98 [20] , [21] , [22] , [23] . Similar findings were observed for other hrHPV tests [7] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…This update contains 19 new reports containing 22 diagnostic studies and nine new randomized participation trials, 26 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 which were added to the 34 accuracy studies and to the 16 participation trials already included in the previous meta-analyses. 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 The updated meta-analyses finally comprised 56 diagnostic test accuracy studies a...…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%