Clinical Medicine Insights: Oncology

Objective: Both PCR and Hybrid Capture II (HCII) have been used for identifying cervical dysplasia; however, comparisons on the performance between these two tests show inconsistent results. We evaluated the performance of HCII and PCR MY09/11 in both screening and diagnostic populations in sub-sample of 1,675 non-pregnant women from a cohort in three clinical centers in the United States and Canada.

Methods: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and concordance between the two tests were calculated.

Results: Specificity of HCII in detecting low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) was higher in the screening group (88.7%; 95% CI: 86.2%–90.8%) compared to the diagnostic group (46.3%; 95% CI: 42.1%–50.6%); however, specificity of PCR was low in both the screening (32.8%; 95% CI: 29.6%–36.2%) and diagnostic (14.4%; 95% CI: 11.6%–17.6%) groups. There was comparable sensitivity by both tests in both groups to detect high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL); however, HCII was more specific (89.1%; 95% CI: 86.8%–91.0%; 66.2%; 95% CI: 62.0%–70.1%) than PCR (33.3%; 95% CI: 30.2%–36.5%; 17.9%; 95% CI: 14.8%–21.6%) in the screening and diagnostic groups, respectively. Overall agreement for HPV positivity was approximately 50% between HCII and PCR MY09/11; with more positive results coming from the PCR MY09/11.

Conclusion: In the current study, PCR MY09/11 was more sensitive but less specific than HCII in detecting LSIL, and HCII was more sensitive and specific in detecting HSIL than PCR in both screening and diagnostic groups.