Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
PIK3CA Mutation Assessment in HR+/HER2− Metastatic Breast Cancer: Overview for Oncology Clinical Practice
Previous Article in Journal
Collection and Handling of Thoracic Small Biopsy and Cytology Specimens for Ancillary Studies: Guidelines from the College of American Pathologists (CAP)
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Comparison Between First-, Second- and Third-Generation Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Brain Metastases
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JMP
Volume 2
Issue 1
10.3390/jmp2010004
jmp-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Different Methods in HPV Genotyping of Anogenital and Oropharyngeal Lesions: Comparison between VisionArray® Technology, Next Generation Sequencing, and Hybrid Capture Assay

by
Giorgia Acquaviva
1,
Michela Visani
1,*,
Viviana Sanza
1,
Antonio De Leo
1,
Thais Maloberti
1,
Paola Pierotti
2,
Paola Crucitti
2,
Guido Collina
3,
Cecilia Chiarelli Olivari
4,
Annalisa Pession
4,
Giovanni Tallini
1 and
Dario de Biase
4
1
Molecular Diagnostic Unit, Department of Medicine (Dipartimento di Medicina Specialistica, Diagnostica e Sperimentale), University of Bologna, Azienda USL di Bologna, viale Ercolani 4/2, 40138 Bologna, Italy
2
Anatomic Pathology Unit, Azienda USL-Maggiore Hospital, 40133 Bologna, Italy
3
Anatomical Pathology Unit, ASUR Marche, Area Vasta 5, Ospedale “C e G Mazzoni” Ascoli Piceno, 63100 Ascoli Piceno, Italy
4
Molecular Diagnostic Unit, Department of Pharmacy and Biotechnology, University of Bologna, viale Ercolani 4/2, 40138 Bologna, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mol. Pathol. 2021, 2(1), 29-41; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmp2010004
Submission received: 18 January 2021 / Revised: 24 February 2021 / Accepted: 24 February 2021 / Published: 4 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Molecular Pathology in Solid Tumors)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

(1) Background: Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are known to be related to the development of about 5% of all human cancers. The clinical relevance of HPV infection has been deeply investigated in carcinomas of the oropharyngeal area, uterine cervix, and anogenital area. To date, several different methods have been used for detecting HPV infection. The aim of the present study was to compare three different methods for the diagnosis of the presence of the HPV genome. (2) Methods: A total of 50 samples were analyzed. Twenty-five of them were tested using both next generation sequencing (NGS) and VisionArray® technology, the other 25 were tested using Hybrid Capture (HC) II assay and VisionArray® technology. (3) Results: A substantial agreement was obtained using NGS and VisionArray® (κ = 0.802), as well as between HC II and VisionArray® (κ = 0.606). In both analyses, the concordance increased if only high risk HPVs I(HR-HPVs) were considered as “positive”. (4) Conclusions: Our data highlighted the importance of technical choice in HPV characterization, which should be guided by the clinical aims, costs, starting material, and turnaround time for results.
Keywords: HPV; next generation sequencing; techniques; genotyping; hybrid capture HPV; next generation sequencing; techniques; genotyping; hybrid capture

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Acquaviva, G.; Visani, M.; Sanza, V.; De Leo, A.; Maloberti, T.; Pierotti, P.; Crucitti, P.; Collina, G.; Chiarelli Olivari, C.; Pession, A.; et al. Different Methods in HPV Genotyping of Anogenital and Oropharyngeal Lesions: Comparison between VisionArray® Technology, Next Generation Sequencing, and Hybrid Capture Assay. J. Mol. Pathol. 2021, 2, 29-41. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmp2010004

AMA Style

Acquaviva G, Visani M, Sanza V, De Leo A, Maloberti T, Pierotti P, Crucitti P, Collina G, Chiarelli Olivari C, Pession A, et al. Different Methods in HPV Genotyping of Anogenital and Oropharyngeal Lesions: Comparison between VisionArray® Technology, Next Generation Sequencing, and Hybrid Capture Assay. Journal of Molecular Pathology. 2021; 2(1):29-41. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmp2010004

Chicago/Turabian Style

Acquaviva, Giorgia, Michela Visani, Viviana Sanza, Antonio De Leo, Thais Maloberti, Paola Pierotti, Paola Crucitti, Guido Collina, Cecilia Chiarelli Olivari, Annalisa Pession, and et al. 2021. "Different Methods in HPV Genotyping of Anogenital and Oropharyngeal Lesions: Comparison between VisionArray® Technology, Next Generation Sequencing, and Hybrid Capture Assay" Journal of Molecular Pathology 2, no. 1: 29-41. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmp2010004

APA Style

Acquaviva, G., Visani, M., Sanza, V., De Leo, A., Maloberti, T., Pierotti, P., Crucitti, P., Collina, G., Chiarelli Olivari, C., Pession, A., Tallini, G., & de Biase, D. (2021). Different Methods in HPV Genotyping of Anogenital and Oropharyngeal Lesions: Comparison between VisionArray® Technology, Next Generation Sequencing, and Hybrid Capture Assay. Journal of Molecular Pathology, 2(1), 29-41. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmp2010004

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop