ABSTRACT
Clinically validated human papillomavirus (HPV) assays are crucial in cervical cancer screening. In this study, we evaluated the Allplex HPV HR Detection assay (Seegene, SouthKorea) for its clinical accuracy and reproducibility according to the international criteria, using the RealTime High Risk HPV m2000 assay (Abbott, USA) as standard comparator. The Allplex HPV HR assay exhibits significant non-inferior sensitivity to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade (CIN) 2 or worse (CIN2+) with a ratio of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.97-1.03, P = 0.006), insignificant non-inferior sensitivity to detect CIN3+ with a ratio of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.88-1.13, P = 0.098), and non-inferior specificity to exclude CIN2+ with a ratio of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.99-1.00, P < 0.001) compared to the standard comparator. In addition, the assay shows an excellent reproducibility within the same laboratory [96.5% (95% CI: 94.6-97.9) with a kappa value of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.95)] and between laboratories [96.7% (95% CI: 94.8-98.0) with a kappa value of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.95)] for overall high-risk HPV positivity as well as for each individual HPV type. Pooling our study data with those of another independent study supports the consistency of our findings. We conclude that both the clinical accuracy to detect cervical precancer and the reproducibility of Allplex HPV HR Detection assay fulfill the international validation criteria of use in cervical cancer screening.IMPORTANCEThe clinical validation of human papillomavirus (HPV) assays in accordance with well-established international guidelines is crucial to ensure that only validated assays are used in the context of screening (Meijer et al., Int J Cancer, 2009). The guidelines, developed by an international consortium, require that a novel HPV assay has non-inferior accuracy against a standard comparator test for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade (CIN) 2 or worse (CIN2+). Additionally, a new HPV assay should meet specific criteria for both intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility to ensure the assay consistently exhibits technical precision and robust performance. Pooling our study data with those of another independent study supports the consistency of our findings. In conclusion, both the clinical accuracy to detect cervical precancer and the reproducibility of Allplex HPV HR Detection assay fulfill the international validation criteria of use in cervical cancer screening.
Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer , Papillomaviridae , Papillomavirus Infections , Sensitivity and Specificity , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification , Papillomaviridae/genetics , Reproducibility of Results , Adult , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/virology , Middle Aged , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , AgedABSTRACT
To meet the screening goal of WHO's 90-70-90 strategy aimed at eliminating cervical cancer (CC) by 2030, clinical validation of human papillomavirus (HPV) assays is essential to provide accurate and valid results through fulfilling three criteria of the international validation guidelines (IVGs). Previously, the clinical accuracy of the AmpFire® HPV Screening 16/18/HR assay (AmpFire assay) was reported but reproducibility data are lacking. Here, we aim to evaluate the intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility of the AmpFire assay. The reproducibility of the isothermal AmpFire assay was assessed using 556 cervical cell samples collected from women attending CC screening and biobanked in a Belgian HPV national reference center. This assay detects HPV16, HPV18, and 12 other high-risk HPV (hrHPV) types (31/33/35/39/45/51/52/56/58/59/66/68) in aggregate. Lower 95% confidence interval bound around the assay's reproducibility should exceed 87%, with κ ≥ 0.50. Additionally, a literature review of the assay's clinical performance was performed. The AmpFire assay showed an excellent intralaboratory (96.4%, 95% CI:94.5-97.8%, κ = 0.920) and interlaboratory (95.3%, 95% CI:93.2-96.9%, κ = 0.897) reproducibility. One study demonstrated noninferior sensitivity of a prototype AmpFire assay targeting 15 hrHPV types (including HPV53) to detect CIN2+. However, clinical specificity became similar to the comparator after removing HPV53 from analyses. The low-cost and easy-to-use AmpFire assay presents excellent reproducibility and-after removing HPV53 from the targeted types-fulfills also clinical accuracy requirements. Inclusion of HPV53, which is not recognized as carcinogenic, comprises clinical specificity of screening assays.
Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Female , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification , Belgium , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Adult , Sensitivity and Specificity , Middle Aged , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/standards , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Cervix Uteri/virologyABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic demonstrated the need for accurate diagnostic testing for the early detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although the pandemic has ended, accurate assays are still needed to monitor viral spread at national levels and beyond through population and wastewater surveillance. To enhance early detection, SARS-CoV-2 assays should have high diagnostic accuracy and should be validated to assure accurate results. Three distinct SARS-CoV-2 assays were evaluated with clinical samples using the VALCOR (VALidation of SARS-CORona Virus-2 assays) framework, with the TaqPath COVID-19 assay (ThermoFisher Scientific, USA) as a comparator. We evaluated clinical sensitivity, specificity, limit of detection (LOD), and overall concordance between comparator and three index Allplex SARS-CoV-2 assays (Seegene, South Korea): Allplex-SC2, Allplex-SC2Fast (Fast PCR), and Allplex-SC2FabR (SARS-CoV-2/FluA/FluB/respiratory syncytial virus). Analytical performance and LOD of index assays were assessed using a dilution series of three synthetic SARS-CoV-2 sequence reference materials (RMs). Ninety SARS-CoV-2 positives and 90 SARS-CoV-2 negatives were tested. All Allplex assays had 100.0% sensitivity (95%CI = 95.9%-100.0%). Allplex-SC2 and Allplex-SC2Fast assays had 97.8% specificity (95%CI = 92.3%-99.7%) and 98.9% overall concordance [κ = 0.978 (95%CI = 0.947-1.000)]. Allplex-SC2FabR assay showed 100.0% specificity (95%CI = 95.9%-100.0%) and 100.0% overall concordance [κ = 1.000 (95%CI = 1.000-1.000)]. LOD assessment of index assays revealed detection down to 2.61 × 102 copies/mL in clinical samples, while the analytical LOD was 9.00 × 102 copies/mL. In conclusion, the evaluation of the three Seegene Allplex SARS-CoV-2 assays showed high sensitivity and specificity and an overall good assay concordance with the comparator. The assays showed low analytical LOD using RM and even a slightly lower LOD in clinical samples. Non-overlapping target gene sequences between SARS-CoV-2 assays and RMs emphasize the need for aligning targeted sequences of diagnostic assays and RMs.IMPORTANCEThe coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has a significant impact on global public health, economies, and societies. As shown through the first phases of the pandemic, accurate and timely diagnosis is crucial for disease control, prevention, and monitoring. Though the pandemic phase of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has concluded, diagnostic assays remain in demand to monitor SARS-CoV-2 at the individual patient level, regionally, and nationally, as well as to remain an infectious disease preparedness instrument to monitor any new SARS-CoV-2 dissemination across borders using population and wastewater surveillance. The anticipation by WHO and central health care policy entities such as the Center for Disease Control, EMA, and multiple national health authorities is that SARS-CoV-2 will reside as an endemic respiratory disease for years to come. The key strategic consideration is hence shifting from combating a pandemic situation with a high number of patients to instead allowing precise diagnostics of suspected patients with the intention of correct management in a low-prevalence setting.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Wastewater , Sensitivity and Specificity , Wastewater-Based Epidemiological MonitoringABSTRACT
The implementation of cervical screening based on human papillomavirus (HPV) continues to progress rapidly across countries. Evidence has shown that assays detecting high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) are more effective than cytology-based screening. Validation of new hrHPV DNA assays requires both noninferior clinical accuracy compared to a standard comparator for cervical precancer and good reproducibility. This study builds upon previous diagnostic accuracy assessments of the RIATOL HPV genotyping qPCR assay and aims to evaluate the international validation criteria for reproducibility. The intra- and interreproducibility of the RIATOL-qPCR assay were assessed using 550 remnant cervical cell material from the cytology archive of the National Reference Center for HPV in Belgium. Specimens were collected in the context of cervical cancer screening and tested in two different laboratories. The international reproducibility criteria include the lower bound of 95% confidence interval of the intra- and interlaboratory agreement regarding the detection of hrHPV DNA exceeding 87% with kappa ≥0.50. The RIATOL-qPCR assay demonstrated excellent intralaboratory reproducibility, achieving an overall agreement of 98.2 (95% CI 96.6-99.1%) and a kappa of 0.96. Interlaboratory testing showed an overall agreement of 98.5 (95% CI 97.1-99.4%) with a kappa of 0.97. The RIATOL-qPCR assay fulfills the third criterion for HPV test reproducibility requirement for use in cervical cancer screening.
Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Early Detection of Cancer , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Genotype , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Reproducibility of Results , Papillomaviridae/genetics , Human Papillomavirus Viruses , DNAABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of diagnostic testing against curbing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. The urgent need and scale for diagnostic tools resulted in manufacturers of SARS-CoV-2 assays receiving emergency authorization that lacked robust analytical or clinical evaluation. As it is highly likely that testing for SARS-CoV-2 will continue to play a central role in public health, the performance characteristics of assays should be evaluated to ensure reliable diagnostic outcomes are achieved. METHODS: VALCOR or "VALidation of SARS-CORona Virus-2 assays" is a study protocol designed to set up a framework for test validation of SARS-CoV-2 virus assays. Using clinical samples collated from VALCOR, the performance of Aptima SARS-CoV-2 assay was assessed against a standard comparator assay. Diagnostic test parameters such as sensitivity, specificity and overall per cent agreement were calculated for the clinical performance of Aptima SARS-CoV-2 assay. RESULTS: A total of 180 clinical samples were tested with an addition of 40 diluted clinical specimens to determine the limit of detection. When compared to the standard comparator assay Aptima had a sensitivity of 100.0% [95% CI 95.9-100.0] and specificity of 96.7% [95% CI 90.8-99.3]. The overall percent agreement was 98.3% with an excellent Cohen's coefficient of κ = 0.967 [95% CI 0.929-1.000]. For the limit of detection, Aptima was able to detect all of the diluted clinical samples. CONCLUSION: In conclusion. validation of Aptima SARS-CoV-2 assay using clinical samples collated through the VALCOR protocol showed excellent test performance. Additionally, Aptima demonstrated high analytical sensitivity by detecting all diluted clinical samples corresponding to a low limit of detection.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , COVID-19 Testing , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Pandemics , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
Human papillomavirus (HPV) assays used in cervical cancer screening should be clinically validated according to international criteria. OncoPredict HPV® Screening (SCR) is a partial genotyping multiplex real-time PCR assay targeting E6/E7 genes of 13 high-risk (hr) HPVs. OncoPredict HPV® SCR (index assay) identifies HPV-16 and HPV-18 separately, 11 other hrHPV in aggregate and includes quality controls for sample adequacy, DNA extraction efficiency and PCR inhibition. 1300 VALGENT-2 study samples (from women aged 20-60 attending the Scottish cervical cancer screening program) were tested with the index assay and the GP5+/6+ PCR enzyme immunoassay (standard comparator assay). Non-inferior accuracy detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) of the index versus comparator was verified. Intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility of the index was evaluated by overall concordance and Cohen's kappa, using a sub-population (n = 526). Relative sensitivity and specificity for CIN2+ of the index versus comparator were 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.99-1.03) and 1.02 (95% CI: 1.0-1.04), respectively. Noninferiority p values were all ≤0.05, except for CIN3+ in patients ≥30 years. Excellent intra- and interlaboratory reproducibility was shown with concordance >98% and kappas >0.95. OncoPredict HPV® SCR fulfills the three international validation criteria for hrHPV DNA tests in cervical cancer screening.
Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections , Uterine Cervical Dysplasia , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Human Papillomavirus Viruses , Genotyping Techniques , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer , Reproducibility of Results , Papillomaviridae/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity , Real-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionABSTRACT
Nasopharyngeal swabs are considered the preferential collection method for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diagnostics. Less invasive and simpler alternative sampling procedures, such as saliva collection, are desirable. We compared saliva specimens and nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs with respect to sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2. A nasopharyngeal and two saliva specimens (collected by spitting or oral swabbing) were obtained from >2500 individuals. All samples were tested by RT-qPCR, detecting RNA of SARS-CoV-2. The test sensitivity was compared on the two saliva collections with the nasopharyngeal specimen for all subjects and stratified by symptom status and viral load. Of the 2850 patients for whom all three samples were available, 105 were positive on NP swab, whereas 32 and 23 were also positive on saliva spitting and saliva swabbing samples, respectively. The sensitivity of the RT-qPCR to detect SARS-CoV-2 among NP-positive patients was 30.5% (95% CI, 1.9%-40.2%) for saliva spitting and 21.9% (95% CI, 14.4%-31.0%) for saliva swabbing. However, when focusing on subjects with medium to high viral load, sensitivity on saliva increased substantially: 93.9% (95% CI, 79.8%-99.3%) and 76.9% (95% CI, 56.4%-91.0%) for spitting and swabbing, respectively, regardless of symptomatic status. Our results suggest that saliva cannot readily replace nasopharyngeal sampling for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics but may enable identification of the most contagious cases with medium to high viral loads.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , COVID-19/virology , Saliva/virology , Specimen Handling/methods , Adult , COVID-19/etiology , Carrier State/virology , Humans , Nasopharynx/virology , Prospective Studies , Specimen Handling/instrumentation , Viral LoadABSTRACT
Only clinically validated human papillomavirus (HPV) tests should be used in cervical cancer screening. VALGENT provides a framework to validate new HPV tests. In the VALGENT-3 study, the clinical accuracy of the recently launched Abbott Alinity m HR HPV assay (Alinity m) to detect cervical precancerous lesions was assessed against the standard comparator test (Hybrid Capture 2; HC2) and against two previously validated alternative comparator tests (Abbott RealTime HR HPV and Roche cobas 4800 assays). Validation was conducted using 1,300 consecutive cervical samples from women attending an organized population-based cervical screening program enriched with 300 cytologically abnormal samples. Overall high-risk HPV test concordance was assessed by kappa values; the concordance for HPV-16 and HPV-18 was assessed for Alinity m, RealTime, and cobas, and the Linear Array (Roche) was used for more detailed genotyping concordance. In the total study population, the relative sensitivity and specificity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and CIN3+ of Alinity m compared to HC2 was 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.06) and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.99 to 1.06), respectively. The relative specificity for nondiseased subjects (≤CIN1) was 1.01 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.02) (all pnon-inferiority ≤ 0.001). Alinity m showed noninferior clinical accuracy among women 30 years or older when cobas or RealTime was used as a comparator. HPV genotype-specific concordance between Alinity m and the three comparator tests showed excellent agreement, with kappa values ranging from 0.82 to 1.00. In conclusion, Alinity m fulfills the international accuracy requirements for use in cervical cancer screening and shows excellent HPV genotype-specific concordance with three clinically validated HPV tests.