MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2964971142 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0220373

Pitfalls of commercially available HPV tests in HPV68a detection

2019· article· en· W2964971142 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hana Jaworek, Kateřina Kubanová, Vladimíra Koudeláková, Rastislav Slavkovský, Jir̆ı́ Drábek, Marián Hajdúch

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of AlbertaKarolinska InstitutetTechnologická Agentura České RepublikyMinisterstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy
KeywordsSubtypingSanger sequencingGenotypeVirologyMedicineViral loadHuman papillomavirusBiologyInternal medicineDNA sequencingVirusGeneticsDNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.114
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.114
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicCervical Cancer and HPV Research→French-language works237,207→