The diagnostic value of serum hybrid capture 2 (CH2) HPV DNA in cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Tumor Biology

Volumn 35, Issue 9, 2014, Pages 9247-9253

  Yin, Duo ^a   Jiang, Yan ^a   Wang, Ning ^a   Ouyang, Ling ^a   Lu, Yanming ^a   Zhang, Yao ^a   Wei, Heng ^a   Zhang, Shulan ^a  

^a CHINA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; Diagnosis; DNA; HC2 HPV DNA; Hybrid capture 2 (HC2)

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; HUMAN; HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS DNA TEST; META ANALYSIS; QUALITY CONTROL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TASK PERFORMANCE; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; ALPHAPAPILLOMAVIRUS; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FEMALE; GENETICS; HOST PATHOGEN INTERACTION; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VIROLOGY;

VIRUS DNA;

ALPHAPAPILLOMAVIRUS; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; DNA, VIRAL; FEMALE; HOST-PATHOGEN INTERACTIONS; HUMANS; PAPILLOMAVIRUS INFECTIONS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84919870797     PISSN: 10104283     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13277-014-2214-4     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Echelman D, Feldman S. Management of cervical precancers: a global perspective. Hematol Oncol Clin N Am. 2012;26:31–44.
2. Ferlay J SH, Bray F. GLOBOCAN 2008 v1.2, cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC Cancer Base No. 10 [Internet]. Lyon (France): International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2010. Available at: http://globocan.iarc.fr. Accessed November 6, 2011.
3. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC Handbooks of cancer prevention: cervix cancer screening, chapter2. Lyon, France: IARC; 2005.
4. Poljak M, Kocjan BJ. Commercially available assays for multiplex detection of alpha human papillomaviruses. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2010;8:1139–62.
5. Smidt N, Deeks J, Moore T. Guide to the contents of a Cochrane review and protocol. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. 2011.
6. Deville WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, Montori VM, de Vet HC, et al. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002;2:9.
7. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:31.
8. Glas AS, Lijmer JG, Prins MH, Bonsel GJ, Bossuyt PM. The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:1129–35.
9. Lijmer JG, Bossuyt PM, Heisterkamp SH. Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 2002;21:1525–37.
10. Walter SD. Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med. 2002;21:1237–56.
11. Jones CM, Athanasiou T. Summary receiver operating characteristic curve analysis techniques in the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;79:16–20.
12. Coste J, Cochand-Priollet B, de Cremoux P, et al. Cross sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervica1 cancer screening [J]. BMJ. 2003;326(7392):733–9.
13. Schneider A, Hoyer H, Lotz B, et al. Screening for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer by testing for high-risk HPV, routine cytology or colposcopy. Int J Cancer. 2000;89(6):529–34.
14. Ratnam S, Franco EL, Ferenczy A. Human papillomavirus testing for primary screening of cervical cancer precursors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2000;9(9):945–51.
15. Miranda PSM, Castelo A, Makabe S, et al. Screening for cervical cancer in high-risk populations: DNA pap test or Hybrid Capture II test alone. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2006;25(1):38–41.
16. Gareia F, Barker B, Santos C, et al. Cross-sectional study of patient and physician collected cervical cytology and human papillomavirus. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(2):266–72.
17. Kumar K, Iyer VK, Bhatla N, et al. Comparative evaluation of smear cytology & hybrid capture II for the diagnosis of cervical cancer. Indian J Med Res. 2007;126(1):39–44.
18. Qiao YL, Zhang WH, Li AL, et al. Cross-sectional comparative study of cervical cancer screening methods. Acta Acad Med Sin. 2002;24(1):51–3.
19. Huang DY. Cervical smears, colposcopy and HPV testing in cervical cancer screening. J Guangxi Med Univ. 2007;24(5):763–4.
20. Lu SY, Zhu SY, Chen YY. The application of the detection of high-risk human papillomavirus by the technology flow-through hybridization gene coms chip in cervical cancer filtrate. Mater Child Health Care China. 2007;22(36):5215–6.
21. Gao N, Yao JP. HPV testing, comparative study of conventional smears and liquid-based producer law in cervical cancer screening. Prog Obstet Gynecol. 2007;16(11):857–9.
22. Song LJ, Wei B, Li YY. Comparative study on the screening methods of cervical intraepithelial neoplasm. Lab Med. 2007;22(2):139–41.
23. Li HY, Zhang W, Zhu SJ, Yang Y, Yi GW. Discussion and research the effective scheme of early cervical cancer screening. Shanxi Med J. 2006;35(7):842–3.
24. Munafo MR, Flint J. Meta-analysis of genetic association studies. Trends Genet. 2004;20:439–44.
25. Ioannidis JP, Boffetta P, Little J, O’Brien TR, Uitterlinden AG, et al. Assessment of cumulative evidence on genetic associations: interim guidelines. Int J Epidemiol. 2008;37:120–32.
26. Jones CM, Athanasiou T. Summary receiver operating characteristic curve analysis techniques in the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;79:16–20.
27. Walter SD. Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med. 2002;21:1237–56.
28. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557–60.