Pitfalls of commercially available HPV tests in HPV68a detection.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
22
03
2019
accepted:
24
05
2019
entrez:
6
8
2019
pubmed:
6
8
2019
medline:
10
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Human papillomavirus 68 (HPV68) is a probable carcinogenic HPV genotype which is included in almost all HPV screening assays and exists as two genetically variable subtypes (HPV68a and HPV68b). Routine HPV sample testing has shown that the cobas 4800 HPV Test (Roche) provides higher false-negative rates for HPV68 status than PapilloCheck HPV-Screening (Greiner Bio-One). The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of cobas 4800 in HPV68 detection. A total of 2,145 cervical/cervicovaginal samples from women aged 17-88 were tested for HPV68 status using the cobas 4800 and PapilloCheck HPV tests. Viral load was assessed by quantitative PCR in all of the HPV68-positive cases. HPV68a/b subtyping was performed with real-time PCR followed by high resolution melting curve analysis, and was subsequently confirmed by Sanger sequencing. Cobas 4800 detected HPV positivity in only 13/33 HPV68 single-genotype infection cases. Viral load was comparable across both tested subgroups. HRM analysis and Sanger sequencing identified the HPV68a subtype in all of the 20 instances of cobas 4800 false negatives. HPV68a and HPV68b were detected in 3/13 and 10/13 cases identified as other HPV-positive by cobas 4800. The HPV68a subtype was missed by cobas 4800 in more than 85% of all HPV68a-positive cases. Therefore, commercially available assays may underestimate HPV68 prevalence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Human papillomavirus 68 (HPV68) is a probable carcinogenic HPV genotype which is included in almost all HPV screening assays and exists as two genetically variable subtypes (HPV68a and HPV68b). Routine HPV sample testing has shown that the cobas 4800 HPV Test (Roche) provides higher false-negative rates for HPV68 status than PapilloCheck HPV-Screening (Greiner Bio-One). The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of cobas 4800 in HPV68 detection.
METHODS
A total of 2,145 cervical/cervicovaginal samples from women aged 17-88 were tested for HPV68 status using the cobas 4800 and PapilloCheck HPV tests. Viral load was assessed by quantitative PCR in all of the HPV68-positive cases. HPV68a/b subtyping was performed with real-time PCR followed by high resolution melting curve analysis, and was subsequently confirmed by Sanger sequencing.
RESULTS
Cobas 4800 detected HPV positivity in only 13/33 HPV68 single-genotype infection cases. Viral load was comparable across both tested subgroups. HRM analysis and Sanger sequencing identified the HPV68a subtype in all of the 20 instances of cobas 4800 false negatives. HPV68a and HPV68b were detected in 3/13 and 10/13 cases identified as other HPV-positive by cobas 4800.
CONCLUSION
The HPV68a subtype was missed by cobas 4800 in more than 85% of all HPV68a-positive cases. Therefore, commercially available assays may underestimate HPV68 prevalence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31381580
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220373
pii: PONE-D-19-08231
pmc: PMC6681972
doi:
Substances chimiques
DNA, Viral
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0220373Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2003 Feb 6;348(6):518-27
pubmed: 12571259
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Jan 19;97(2):147-50
pubmed: 15657345
Bioinformatics. 2007 May 15;23(10):1289-91
pubmed: 17379693
Vaccine. 2008 Aug 19;26 Suppl 10:K1-16
pubmed: 18847553
Lancet Oncol. 2009 Apr;10(4):321-2
pubmed: 19350698
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Nov;48(11):4147-55
pubmed: 20844222
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Nov;11(11):1048-56
pubmed: 20952254
Int J Cancer. 2012 Nov 15;131(10):2349-59
pubmed: 22323075
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012 Nov 21;104(22):1712-23
pubmed: 23104323
IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risks Hum. 2012;100(Pt B):1-441
pubmed: 23189750
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 May;51(5):1478-84
pubmed: 23447640
Hum Mutat. 2014 Mar;35(3):278-82
pubmed: 24375593
J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Feb;52(2):449-59
pubmed: 24478473
Korean J Pathol. 2014 Feb;48(1):43-9
pubmed: 24627694
J Pathol. 2014 Dec;234(4):441-51
pubmed: 25043390
J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Nov;52(11):4033-5
pubmed: 25143570
Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Apr;137(1):47-54
pubmed: 25667973
Int J Infect Dis. 2017 Feb;55:51-55
pubmed: 28088590
J Clin Virol. 2018 Jan;98:37-42
pubmed: 29241150
BMC Womens Health. 2018 Jan 02;18(1):1
pubmed: 29291721
J Mol Diagn. 2018 Nov;20(6):849-858
pubmed: 30165205
Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2019 Jan 10;:null
pubmed: 30631209
J Clin Microbiol. 1996 Mar;34(3):738-44
pubmed: 8904450