Page 147 - Screening for Cervical Cancer: Systematic Evidence Review

Appendix C. Evidence Tables

Evidence Table 3B. Performance of HPV Testing for Triage (cont’d)

Patients & Methods Outcomes Measured Study Results & Limitations* Quality Considerations
167 patients with Primary outcome: Prevalence: Quality Score=5
abnormal Paps Wart virus changes, WVC or CIN I Ref. Std.:2
referred for CIN I, II, III or invasive =88/167=52.6% Blind: 0
colposcopy carcinoma CIN II, III or ca Verification: 0
=40/167=24.0% Consecutive:0
Spectrum:1
Se (PCR, ≥CIN II)=87.5% Publication:1
Sp (PCR, ≥CIN II)=62.2% Industry:1

520 women referred Primary outcome: Prevalence: Quality Score=4.5
to colposcopy clinic Low grade CIN LG CIN = 161/520=31% Ref. Std.:2
High grade CIN or HG CIN or ca= Blind: 0
cancer 105/520=20.2% Verification: 0
Consecutive:0
Secondary outcome: Se (HC, ≥CIN I)=58.3% Spectrum:1
Amount of HPV DNA Sp (HC, ≥CIN I)=69.3% Publication:1
by relative light unit Industry:0.5
reading Se (HC, ≥CIN II)=66.7%
Sp (HC, ≥CIN II)=60.7%

Se (PCR, ≥CIN I)=84.6%
Sp (PCR, ≥CIN I)=48.0%

Se (PCR, ≥CIN II)=82.9%
Sp (PCR, ≥CIN II)=34.9%

C-53