Related Experiment Video For Cervical cancer
Updated: Mar 8, 2026
Author Spotlight: Advancements and Challenges in Hepatitis B Virus Detection
Published on: December 15, 2023
Comparison of the Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test and the Roche cobas 4800 HPV test using urine samples
Myong Cheol Lim1, Do-Hoon Lee2, Sang-Hyun Hwang3
1Center for Uterine Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang-si 410-769, Republic of Korea; Gynecologic Cancer Branch, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang-si 410-769, Republic of Korea.
Background:
Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing based on cervical samples is important for use in cervical cancer screening. However, cervical sampling is invasive. Therefore, non-invasive methods for detecting HPV, such as urine samples, are needed.
Objectives:
For HPV detection in urine samples, two real-time PCR (RQ-PCR) tests, Roche cobas 4800 test (Roche_HPV; Roche Molecular Diagnostics) and Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV test (Abbott_HPV; Abbott Laboratories) were compared to standard cervical samples.
Study Design:
The performance of Roche_HPV and Abbott_HPV for HPV detection was evaluated at the National Cancer Center using 100 paired cervical and urine samples. The tests were also compared using urine samples stored at various temperatures and for a range of durations.
Results:
The overall agreement between the Roche_HPV and Abbott_HPV tests using urine samples for any hrHPV type was substantial (86.0% with a kappa value of 0.7173), and that for HPV 16/18 was nearly perfect (99.0% with a kappa value of 0.9668). The relative sensitivities (based on cervical samples) for HPV 16/18 detection using Roche_HPV and Abbott_HPV with urine samples were 79.2% (95% CI; 57.9-92.9%) and 81.8% (95% CI; 59.7-94.8%), respectively. When the cut-off CT value for Abbott_HPV was extended to 40 for urine samples, the relative sensitivity of Abbott_HPV increased to 91.7% from 81.8% for HPV16/18 detection and to 87.0% from 68.5% for other hrHPV detection. The specificity was not affected by the change in the CT threshold.
Conclusions:
Roche_HPV and Abbott_HPV showed high concordance. However, HPV DNA detection using urine samples was inferior to HPV DNA detection using cervical samples. Interestingly, when the cut-off CT value was set to 40, Abbott_HPV using urine samples showed high sensitivity and specificity, comparable to those obtained using cervical samples. Fully automated DNA extraction and detection systems, such as Roche_HPV and Abbott_HPV, could reduce the variability in HPV detection and accelerate the standardization of HPV detection in urine. Thus, urine samples may be an effective alternative for HPV detection in women who hesitate to participate in cervical cancer screening programs.
