Human papillomavirus detection with genotyping by the cobas and Aptima assays: Significant differences in HPV 16 detection?

Autor: Chorny JA; Regional Reference Laboratory, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, Colorado 80239., Frye TC; Regional Reference Laboratory, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, Colorado 80239., Fisher BL; Regional Reference Laboratory, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, Colorado 80239., Remmers CL; Utility for Care Data Analytics, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California 94612.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Diagnostic cytopathology [Diagn Cytopathol] 2018 Jul; Vol. 46 (7), pp. 568-571. Date of Electronic Publication: 2018 Mar 23.
DOI: 10.1002/dc.23930
Abstrakt: Background: The primary high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) assays in the United States are the cobas (Roche) and the Aptima (Hologic). The cobas assay detects hrHPV by DNA analysis while the Aptima detects messenger RNA (mRNA) oncogenic transcripts. As the Aptima assay identifies oncogenic expression, it should have a lower rate of hrHPV and genotype detection.
Methods: The Kaiser Permanente Regional Reference Laboratory in Denver, Colorado changed its hrHPV assay from the cobas to the Aptima assay. The rates of hrHPV detection and genotyping were compared over successive six-month periods.
Results: The overall hrHPV detection rates by the two platforms were similar (9.5% versus 9.1%) and not statistically different. For genotyping, the HPV 16 rate by the cobas was 1.6% and by the Aptima it was 1.1%. These differences were statistically different with the Aptima detecting nearly one-third less HPV 16 infections. With the HPV 18 and HPV 18/45, there was a slightly higher detection rate of HPV 18/45 by the Aptima platform (0.5% versus 0.9%) and this was statistically significant.
Conclusion: While HPV 16 represents a low percentage of hrHPV infections, it was detected significantly less by the Aptima assay compared to the cobas assay. This has been previously reported, although not highlighted. Given the test methodologies, one would expect the Aptima to detect less HPV 16. This difference appears to be mainly due to a significantly increased number of non-oncogenic HPV 16 infections detected by the cobas test as there were no differences in HPV 16 detection rates in the high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions indicating that the two tests have similar sensitivities for oncogenic HPV 16.
(© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: