Validation of a Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA Cervical Screening Test That Provides Expanded HPV Typing.
As cervical cancer screening shifts from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, a major question is the clinical value of identifying individual HPV types. We aimed to validate Onclarity (Becton Dickinson Diagnostics, Sparks, MD), a nine-channel HPV test recently approved by the FDA, by assessing (i) the association of Onclarity types/channels with precancer/cancer; (ii) HPV type/channel agreement between the results of Onclarity and cobas (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, CA), another FDA-approved test; and (iii) Onclarity typing for all types/channels compared to typing results from a research assay (linear array [LA]; Roche). We compared Onclarity to histopathology, cobas, and LA. We tested a stratified random sample (n = 9,701) of discarded routine clinical specimens that had tested positive by Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2; Qiagen, Germantown, MD). A subset had already been tested by cobas and LA (n = 1,965). Cervical histopathology was ascertained from electronic health records. Hierarchical Onclarity channels showed a significant linear association with histological severity. Onclarity and cobas had excellent agreement on partial typing of HPV16, HPV18, and the other 12 types as a pool (sample-weighted kappa value of 0.83); cobas was slightly more sensitive for HPV18 and slightly less sensitive for the pooled high-risk types. Typing by Onclarity showed excellent agreement with types and groups of types identified by LA (kappa values from 0.80 for HPV39/68/35 to 0.97 for HPV16). Onclarity typing results corresponded well to histopathology and to an already validated HPV DNA test and could provide additional clinical typing if such discrimination is determined to be clinically desirable.
Demarco M
,Carter-Pokras O
,Hyun N
,Castle PE
,He X
,Dallal CM
,Chen J
,Gage JC
,Befano B
,Fetterman B
,Lorey T
,Poitras N
,Raine-Bennett TR
,Wentzensen N
,Schiffman M
... -
《-》
Machine Learning Interpretation of Extended Human Papillomavirus Genotyping by Onclarity in an Asian Cervical Cancer Screening Population.
This study aimed (i) to compare the performance of the BD Onclarity human papillomavirus (HPV) assay with the Cobas HPV test in identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3 or above (CIN2/3+) in an Asian screening population and (ii) to explore improving the cervical cancer detection specificity of Onclarity by machine learning. We tested 605 stratified random archived samples of cervical liquid-based cytology samples with both assays. All samples had biopsy diagnosis or repeated negative cytology follow-up. Association rule mining (ARM) was employed to discover coinfection likely to give rise to CIN2/3+. Outcome classifiers interpreting the extended genotyping results of Onclarity were built with different underlying models. The sensitivities (Onclarity, 96.32%; Cobas, 95.71%) and specificities (Onclarity, 46.38%; Cobas, 45.25%) of the high-risk HPV (hrHPV) components of the two tests were not significantly different. When HPV16 and HPV18 were used to further interpret hrHPV-positive cases, Onclarity displayed significantly higher specificity (Onclarity, 87.10%; Cobas, 80.77%). Both hrHPV tests achieved the same sensitivities (Onclarity, 90.91%; Cobas, 90.91%) and similar specificities (Onclarity, 48.46%; Cobas, 51.98%) when used for triaging atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Positivity in both HPV16 and HPV33/58 of the Onclarity channels entails the highest probability of developing CIN2/3+. Incorporating other hrHPVs into the outcome classifiers improved the specificity of identifying CIN2/3 to up to 94.32%. The extended genotyping of Onclarity therefore can help to highlight patients having the highest risk of developing CIN2/3+, with the potential to reduce unnecessary colposcopy and negative psychosocial impact on women receiving the reports.
Wong OGW
,Ng IFY
,Tsun OKL
,Pang HH
,Ip PPC
,Cheung ANY
... -
《-》
Detection and genotyping of HPV-DNA through different types of diagnostic platforms in liquid-based cervical-cytology samples.
At present cervical cancer represents the second most common cancer in women worldwide and it reaches a global mortality rate of 52%. Only the early detection and the adequate treatment of pre-neoplastic lesions and early-stage cervical cancer decrease the mortality rate for this type of cancer. Cervical carcinoma screening, as a method of second prevention, is currently feasible through molecular research of high-risk HPV genotypes and in lots of organized screening programs the Pap-test is performed only in women with positive HPV-test. Currently, there are various diagnostic platforms detecting and molecular genotyping HPV, which are based on different procedures, determining uneven viral genotypes panels and using diverse type of vials to collect and store the samples. Previous studies have pointed out that DNA-HPV test can be negative in pre-neoplastic lesions, even of high grade, or in presence of cervical cancer. Therefore, it's important to assess the risk of false negative diagnoses using DNA-HPV molecular test, because in this circumstance women do not undergo immediately Pap-test, but they are submitted to second round screening with DNA-HPV test after 5 years: this protocol could increase the incidence of "interval cancers". The present study aims at comparing the results of HPV detection and genotyping on liquid based cervical cytology, using some of the most relevant diagnostic platforms in commerce.
The study is based on a group of patients which went to their private gynecologist in a contest of opportunistic screening. The vial used in the examined population has been EASYPREP® preservative solution (YD Diagnostics CORP-Republic of Korea); liquid-based cervical cytology sampling has been done using a single device (plastic brush), allowing to collect simultaneously cytological material from exocervix and endocervix (Rovers® Cervex-Brush®). The diagnostic platforms employed have been the following: A) Digene HC2 HPV DNA Test, on RCS System (QIAGEN); B) BD Onclarity™ HPV test, on automate platform BD Viper™ LT (Becton Dickinson); C) Xpert® HPV, on GeneXpert® Infinity Systems platform (Cepheid). Every platform researched high-risk HPV genotypes panels (hr-HPV). Part of the clinical records has also been analyzed through PCR and genes L1 and E6/E7 complete sequencing, in order to further typing the viral population.
We have examined 1284 samples of women aged 16 to 73 years: 1125 have been tested using HC2 procedure, 272 samples with Onclarity method, 159 with Xpert® method and 55 samples have been analyzed using PCR and sequencing of gene L1 and gene E6/E7. HPV-DNA was detected with Onclarity method in 15,07%, with Xpert® method in 13,83% and using HC2 procedure in 12,27% of samples. The comparison between the three molecular methods revealed diagnostic discrepancies in 3,14% of our records between Onclarity test and Xpert® method and in 2,20% (6/272) between HC2 test and Onclarity test. Globally, in 431 tests, compared using different diagnostic platforms, discrepant diagnoses, referring to hr-HPV presence or to detected genotype, have been observed 11 times (2,55%). Genotype 16 appeared the most expressed in the positive samples (20,99%), whereas genotype 18 resulted the less expressed in the examined population (4,94%).
The present study highlights the following: 1) Positive results' percentage for high-risk HPV-DNA genotypes, deriving from the three diagnostic platforms used and with the same vial to collect and store samples, does not significantly vary on the basis of the type of equipment and it is congruent with the Italian percentage already detected during organized screening programs. 2) Even the molecular diagnostic approach could give false negative results, preventing the detection in the screened population of cervical HPV-related lesions and theoretically endangering women to develop "interval cancer". 3) In the population examined, genotype 16 has been the most expressed, whereas genotype 18 was among the less frequently detected. Other genotypes often noticed have been: 56-59-66 (Onclarity P3 group), 31, 51 and 35-39-68 (Onclarity P2 group). This remark emphasizes the importance of HPV infection and genotypes distribution's continuous monitoring, considering that HPV-vaccines planned in Italy in the "National vaccination prevention program 2017-2019" are not specific for the majority of these genotypes. 4) The necessity to improve the screening program to identify cervical carcinomas and pre-neoplastic cervical lesions is remarked by the detection during HPV-test of possible coinfection (present at least in 8,76% of our records). In fact, the risk of development of cervical cancer might be associated with type-specific interactions between genotypes in multiple infections and, in addition, other genotypes, not targeted by quadrivalent HPV-vaccine, can increase the risk of cervical carcinoma. 5) As there's a different combination of HPV-genotypes in diagnostic categories used by the HPV screening platforms, it's important that anyone who is in charge of this diagnostic analysis promotes among clinicians the adequate rendition of the laboratory's data in the patient records, reporting both the diagnostic result and the method through which it has been obtained.
Cassani B
,Soldano G
,Finocchiaro D
,Conti S
,Bulfamante A
,Lemorini G
,Bulfamante G
... -
《-》
Concordance between the BD Onclarity and Roche cobas assays for detection of HPV DNA in a Chinese population.
As cervical cancer screening shifts from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, a major issue involves validating more HPV tests. In recent years, some HPV tests are used for clinical performance verification in China. The purpose of this study was to explore whether the BD Onclarity (Becton, Dickinson and Company)HPV assay differs from the Roche cobas (Roche Molecular Systems)HPV assay, as determined using 944 cervical samples, including 588 with sequencing results. In the nucleic acid assay accuracy verification, the assays showed excellent concordance for detection of HPV16 (κ = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-0.97) and HPV18 (κ = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.83-0.97), and very good concordance for the 12 other high-risk types (HPV31/33/35/39/45/51/52/56/58/59/66/68, κ = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.75-0.83). The overall agreement for HPV DNA detection between Onclarity and cobas was very good (κ = 0.7755). No difference for ≥CIN2 sensitivity was observed between Onclarity and cobas (both 96.5%), whereas the ≥CIN2 specificity for detection of Onclarity (16.6%, 95% CI: 13.7-19.9) was higher than that of cobas (11.5%, 95% CI: 9.1-14.5). Onclarity exhibited comparable screening performance and triage efficiency compared to cobas in the detection of cervical disease in Chinese women.
Wang Y
,Li T
,Yin J
,Liu Y
,Li Z
,Liu Y
,Chen T
,Chen S
,Dai Y
,Cui J
,Liu B
,Feng X
,Zhang S
,Chen W
... -
《-》