Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Virol. 2015 Aug;69:210-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jcv.2015.06.080. Epub 2015 Jun 19.

A pilot study to compare dry cervical sample collection with standard practice of wet cervical samples for human papillomavirus testing.

Author information

1
Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
2
Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Victorian Cervical Cytology Registry, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
3
Royal Women's Hospital, Cnr Flemington Road and Grattan Street, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
4
Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Cancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
5
Victorian Cervical Cytology Registry, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
6
Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; National HPV Vaccination Program Register, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
7
Victorian Cytology Services, VCS Inc, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
8
Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA; Global Coalition Against Cervical Cancer, Arlington, VA, USA.
9
Victorian Cytology Services, VCS Inc, Carlton, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: msaville@vcs.org.au.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

For human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA detection, specimen collection and transportation using a dry swab without transport medium has advantages, in various situations, over liquid media.

OBJECTIVE:

In this pilot study we evaluated whether a dry cervical sample taken with a flocked swab (dry sample) is a valid alternative for HPV DNA testing compared with the standard practice of a wet sample taken with a cyto-broom placed directly into liquid media (wet sample).

STUDY DESIGN:

Women attending the dysplasia clinic at the Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne Australia between November 2013 and February 2014 were enrolled. During colposcopic examination, a practitioner collected wet and dry cervical samples, with the order of collection randomised. In the laboratory both samples were left for a week before being tested for 14 high-risk HPV types using the Roche Cobas 4800 test.

RESULTS:

Overall, 209 had valid HPV results from both samples. The observed agreement for HPV detection between wet and dry samples was 92.8% and kappa was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.78-0.92). There was no statistical difference in the percent HPV positive for each sample (p = 0.30). HPV testing of the dry sample had an 88.5% (95% CI: 79.9-94.3%) sensitivity for HPV detected using the wet specimen. For the HPV results categorized hierarchically, there was 92.8% overall agreement and a kappa of 0.87 (95% CI = 0.80-0.93) for the paired results.

CONCLUSION:

Using dry flocked swabs to collect cervical cells is a valid alternative to collecting wet samples for HPV DNA testing using a PCR based test.

KEYWORDS:

Cervical sample; Dry swab; HPV testing; Randomised

PMID:
26209409
DOI:
10.1016/j.jcv.2015.06.080
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center