Guerrero E, Daniel R W, Bosch F X, Castellsagué X, Muñoz N, Gili M, Viladiu P, Navarro C, Zubiri M L, Ascunce N
Abbott Cientifica S.A., Madrid, Spain.
J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Nov;30(11):2951-9. doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.11.2951-2959.1992.
In order to provide a reliable diagnosis for the presence and type of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA in a case-control study of cervical cancer in Colombia and Spain, 926 cervical scrapes from female subjects were examined by ViraPap (VP) and Southern hybridization (SH), and 510 of these (263 cases and 247 controls) were also tested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the HPV L1 consensus primers. HPV DNA prevalence was much higher in cases than in controls by each of the three tests. There was complete agreement between the results of the three tests for 64.9% of the 510 specimens; 53.5% were negative and 11.4% were positive (regardless of type) by all tests. An additional 29.0% of the specimens were positive by PCR: 19.4% by PCR alone, 6.7% by PCR and VP, and 2.9% by PCR and SH. SH and/or VP gave positive results for 6.0% of the specimens for which the PCR finding was negative: 2.7% by SH alone, 2.5% by VP alone, and 0.8% by both VP and SH. When specimens which were positive by VP alone or only by SH at low-stringency conditions were excluded, PCR confirmed all but four specimens which were positive by other tests. The concordance between type-specific diagnosis by SH and PCR was 86% when HPVs were typed in both tests. HPV-16 accounted for over 80% of the typed HPVs in each test. The presence of blood in case specimens did not appear to inhibit HPV positivity by VP or by PCR at the dilution tested. Low amounts of cellular DNA of specimens resulted in some underestimation of HPV positivity by VP and SH but not by PCR. Compared with that of PCR, the sensitivities for case specimens were 38% by SH and 50% by VP; the sensitivity for control specimens, although it could not be measured precisely because there were few positive specimens, appeared to be lower than for case specimens. It was concluded that PCR-based tests are best suited for epidemiological investigation of HPVs.
为了在哥伦比亚和西班牙进行的一项宫颈癌病例对照研究中对人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)DNA的存在及类型提供可靠诊断,采用ViraPap(VP)和Southern杂交(SH)技术对926例女性受试者的宫颈刮片进行了检测,其中510例(263例病例和247例对照)还使用HPV L1共有引物通过聚合酶链反应(PCR)进行了检测。通过这三种检测方法中的每一种,病例组中HPV DNA的流行率均远高于对照组。在510份标本中,三种检测结果完全一致的占64.9%;所有检测中,53.5%为阴性,11.4%为阳性(无论类型)。另外29.0%的标本经PCR检测为阳性:仅PCR阳性的占19.4%,PCR和VP阳性的占6.7%,PCR和SH阳性的占2.9%。对于PCR检测结果为阴性的标本,SH和/或VP检测有6.0%呈阳性:仅SH阳性的占2.7%,仅VP阳性的占2.5%,VP和SH均阳性的占0.8%。排除仅VP或仅在低严谨条件下SH阳性的标本后,PCR确认了除4份其他检测方法阳性的标本外的所有标本。当在两种检测中对HPV进行分型时,SH和PCR的型特异性诊断一致性为86%。每次检测中,HPV-16在分型的HPV中占比超过80%。病例标本中血液的存在在测试的稀释度下似乎并未抑制VP或PCR检测的HPV阳性结果。标本中细胞DNA量低会导致VP和SH对HPV阳性率的一些低估,但PCR不会。与PCR相比,病例标本的SH敏感性为38%,VP敏感性为50%;对照标本的敏感性,尽管由于阳性标本很少无法精确测量,但似乎低于病例标本。得出的结论是,基于PCR的检测最适合用于HPV的流行病学调查。