Human papillomavirus typing with GP5+/6+ polymerase chain reaction reverse line blotting and with commercial type-specific PCR kits.

BACKGROUND

Infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary step in the progression to cervical cancer. Many methods for HPV testing are currently available, most developed to detect pools of HPV types.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the HPV typing by molecular methods and to compare commercial kits with an established laboratory method.

STUDY DESIGN

Eighty-four cervical samples found to be positive for HPV DNA by GP5+/6+-polymerase chain reaction-enzyme immunoassay-reverse line blotting (PCR-EIA-RLB) were re-tested with two commercial methods, INNO-LiPA and Amplisense HPV typing, able to identify the HPV type predicted by PCR-EIA-RLB in 76 and 67 samples, respectively.

RESULTS

The INNO-LiPA assay revealed HPV DNA in 75/76 samples (98.7%; 95% CI, 0.93-0.99) that would contain HPV types identifiable by this assay. The Amplisense HPV assay revealed HPV DNA in 58/67 samples (86.6%; 95% CI, 0.76-0.93) containing HPV types detectable by this assay. For samples with a single infection, the unweighted kappa for concordance of HPV typing was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78-0.97) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus INNO-LiPA, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.87-0.99) for INNO-LiPA versus Amplisense HPV, and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70-0.94) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus Amplisense HPV typing. PCR-EIA-RLB revealed 12 multiple infections, INNO-LiPA revealed 14, and Amplisense HPV revealed 5. The agreement among tests for samples with multiple infections was lower, giving kappa values of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.18-0.70) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus INNO-LiPA, 0.52 (95% CI, 0.19-0.85) for PCR-EIA-RLB versus Amplisense HPV and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.12-0.74) for INNO-LiPA versus Amplisense HPV.

CONCLUSIONS

In HPV-positive samples, the agreement among tests for HPV typing was high for single infections but markedly lower for infections with multiple HPV types.