Skip to Content

As a result of the current Federal government funding situation, the information on this website may not be up to date or acted upon.

The NIH Clinical Center (the research hospital of NIH) is open. For more details about its operating status, please visit https://cc.nih.gov.

Updates regarding government operating status and resumption of normal operations can be found at https://www.opm.gov.

Discovering the causes of cancer and the means of prevention

Publications Search - Abstract View

Title: A comparison of linear array and hybrid capture 2 for detection of carcinogenic human papillomavirus and cervical precancer in ASCUS-LSIL triage study.
Authors: Gravitt PE,  Schiffman M,  Solomon D,  Wheeler CM,  Castle PE
Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
Date: 2008 May
Branches: MEB
PubMed ID: 18483347
PMC ID: PMC2705141
Abstract: BACKGROUND: We were interested in comparing the performance of Linear Array (LA; Roche Molecular Systems) to Hybrid Capture 2 (hc2; Digene) for the detection of carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical precancer. METHODS: LA and hc2 results were compared on baseline specimens collected from women with an atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) Pap referred into ASCUS and Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study (n = 3,488). hc2 was conducted at the time of the study on liquid cytology specimens. LA was conducted retrospectively on aliquots from a second, stored cervical specimen masked to the hc2 results and clinical data. Paired LA and hc2 results (n = 3,289; 94%) were compared for the detection of carcinogenic HPV (HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68) and 2-year cumulative cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade >or=3 as diagnosed by the quality-control pathology review. RESULTS: LA was more likely to test positive for carcinogenic HPV than hc2 (55% versus 53%; P = 0.001). For 2-year cumulative >or=CIN3, LA and hc2 had similar sensitivities (93.3% versus 92.6%, respectively; P = 1), and LA was marginally less specific than hc2 (48.1% versus 50.6%, respectively; P = 0.05). LA and hc2 had similar negative predictive values (98.70% versus 98.64% respectively; P = 0.4), and LA had a slightly lower positive predictive value than hc2 (14.6% versus 15.1%, respectively; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We observed that LA and hc2 performed similarly in the detection of carcinogenic HPV and identification of CIN3 among women with an ASCUS Pap.