Close
Help


Evaluation the Performance of PCR Versus HC II

Posted Thu, Sep, 26,2013

Published today in Clinical Medicine Insights: Oncology is a new original research article by Hung N. Luu, Karen Adler-Storthz, Laura M. Dillon, Michele Follen and Michael E. Scheurer.  Read more about this paper below:

Title

Comparing the Performance of Hybrid Capture II and Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for the Identification of Cervical Dysplasia in the Screening and Diagnostic Settings

Abstract

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.

Click here to learn more about the article, download it and comment

share on

Posted in: Articles Published

  • Efficient Processing: 4 Weeks Average to First Editorial Decision
  • Fair & Independent Expert Peer Review
  • High Visibility & Extensive Database Coverage
Services for Authors
What Your Colleagues Say About Libertas Academica
As an author, I had a wonderful experience working with the editorial team of Nutrition and Metabolic Insights. Starting from the review process to proof processing and finalization of publication, I enjoyed the helpful nature and prompt response of the editorial and managerial team, and found them highly professional. The online review process was very well organized. I would love to work with the publication house in the future too. Keep up the spirit. ...
Dr Arun Sedhain (National Academy of Medical Sciences (NAMS), Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal)
More Testimonials

Quick Links


New article and journal news notification services
Email Alerts RSS Feeds
Facebook Google+ Twitter
Pinterest Tumblr YouTube