Geraets Daan T, Struijk Linda, Kleter Bernhard, Molijn Anco, van Doorn Leen-Jan, Quint Wim G V, Colau Brigitte
DDL Diagnostic Laboratory, Visseringlaan 25, 2288 ER Rijswijk, The Netherlands.
DDL Diagnostic Laboratory, Visseringlaan 25, 2288 ER Rijswijk, The Netherlands.
J Virol Methods. 2015 Apr;215-216:22-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2015.01.001. Epub 2015 Feb 16.
Two commercial HPV tests target the same 65 bp fragment of the human papillomavirus genome (designated SPF10): the original HPV SPF10 PCR-DEIA-LiPA25 system, version 1, (LiPA25) and the INNO-LiPA HPV Genotyping Extra (INNO-LiPA). The original SPF10 LiPA25 system was designed to have high analytical sensitivity and applied in HPV vaccine and epidemiology studies worldwide. But due to apparent similarities, this test can be easily confused with INNO-LiPA, a more recent assay of which the intended use, i.e., epidemiological or clinical, is currently unclear. The aim was to compare the analytical sensitivity of SPF10 LiPA25 to that of INNO-LiPA on the level of general HPV detection and genotyping. HPV testing by both assays was performed on the same DNA isolated from cervical swab (n = 365) and biopsy (n = 42) specimens. In cervical swabs, SPF10 LiPA25 and INNO-LiPA identified 35.3% and 29.3% multiple infections, 52.6% and 51.5% single infections, and no HPV type in 12.1% and 19.2%, respectively. Genotyping results were 64.7% identical, 26.0% compatible and 9.3% discordant between both methods. SPF10 LiPA25 detected significantly more genotypes (p < 0.001). The higher analytical sensitivity of SPF10 LiPA25 was confirmed by the MPTS123 genotyping assay. HPV positivity by the general probes in SPF10 DEIA was significantly higher (87.9%) than by those on INNO-LiPA (77.0%) (kappa = 0.592, p < 0.001). In cervical biopsies, SPF10 LiPA25 and INNO-LiPA identified 21.4% and 9.5% multiple types, 76.2% and 81.0% single types, and no type in 2.4% and 9.5%, respectively. Between both tests, the identification of genotypes was 76.3% identical, 14.3% compatible and 9.5% discordant. Overall, significantly more genotypes were detected by SPF10 LiPA25 (kappa = 0.853, p = 0.022). HPV positivity was higher by the SPF10 DEIA (97.6%) than by the INNO-LiPA strip (92.9%). These results demonstrate that SPF10 LiPA25 is more suitable for HPV genotyping in epidemiologic and vaccine-related studies, due to its higher analytical sensitivity.
两种商用HPV检测方法针对人乳头瘤病毒基因组的同一65 bp片段(命名为SPF10):最初的HPV SPF10 PCR-DEIA-LiPA25系统第1版(LiPA25)和INNO-LiPA HPV基因分型增强检测法(INNO-LiPA)。最初的SPF10 LiPA25系统设计用于具备高分析灵敏度,并在全球范围内应用于HPV疫苗和流行病学研究。但由于明显的相似性,该检测方法容易与INNO-LiPA混淆,后者是一种更新的检测方法,其预期用途(即流行病学或临床用途)目前尚不清楚。目的是在一般HPV检测和基因分型水平上比较SPF10 LiPA25与INNO-LiPA的分析灵敏度。两种检测方法均对从宫颈拭子(n = 365)和活检标本(n = 42)中分离出的相同DNA进行HPV检测。在宫颈拭子中,SPF10 LiPA25和INNO-LiPA分别检测出35.3%和29.3%的多重感染、52.6%和51.5%的单一感染,以及12.1%和19.2%未检测到HPV型别。两种方法的基因分型结果64.7%相同、26.0%相符、9.3%不一致。SPF10 LiPA25检测到的基因型显著更多(p < 0.001)。MPTS123基因分型检测证实了SPF10 LiPA25具有更高的分析灵敏度。SPF10 DEIA中通用探针检测到的HPV阳性率(87.9%)显著高于INNO-LiPA上的通用探针(77.0%)(kappa = 0.592,p < 0.001)。在宫颈活检中,SPF10 LiPA25和INNO-LiPA分别检测出21.4%和9.5%的多种型别、76.2%和81.0%的单一型别,以及2.4%和9.5%未检测到型别。两种检测方法之间,基因型鉴定结果76.3%相同、14.3%相符、9.5%不一致。总体而言,SPF10 LiPA25检测到的基因型显著更多(kappa = 0.853,p = 0.022)。SPF10 DEIA检测到的HPV阳性率(97.6%)高于INNO-LiPA试纸条(92.9%)。这些结果表明,由于具有更高的分析灵敏度,SPF10 LiPA25更适合用于流行病学和疫苗相关研究中的HPV基因分型。