| Abstrakt: |
Our objective was to directly compare the accuracy of the high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) assays, Hybrid Capture 2 (hc2; Qiagen, Gaithersburg, MD) and Cervista (Hologic, Bedford, MA), in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 3 or worse (cancer). A population-based, cross-sectional study (The Shenzhen Cervical Cancer Screening Trial II) was conducted in Guangdong Province in China. Three high-risk HPV assays, self and direct cervical sampling and cytology, were studied. Abnormal results on any of 6 study tests (33%) resulted in referral to colposcopy. At colposcopy, every patient had at least 5 cervical biopsy specimens obtained. For 8,556 women between the ages of 25 and 59 years (mean, 38.9 years), the rate for CIN 3 or worse was 1.6% (141/8,556). The sensitivity (confidence interval) values for CIN 3 or worse were 97.9% (94.0%-99.6%) and 95.1% (90.0%-98.0%) for hc2 and Cervista, respectively (P > .05). The specificity (confidence interval) values were 87.8% (87.1%-88.5%) and 90.3% (89.6%-90.9%), respectively (P < .05). Differences in accuracy in diagnosing CIN 3 or worse with the hc2 and Cervista tests are minor and result from the decisions made in selecting the cut points. |
