↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of HPV genotyping and methylated ZNF582 as triage for women with equivocal liquid-based cytology results

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epigenetics, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of HPV genotyping and methylated ZNF582 as triage for women with equivocal liquid-based cytology results
Published in
Clinical Epigenetics, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13148-015-0084-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu-Ligh Liou, Yu Zhang, Yingzi Liu, Lanqin Cao, Chong-Zhen Qin, Tao-Lan Zhang, Chi-Feng Chang, Huei-Jen Wang, Shu-Yi Lin, Tang-Yuan Chu, Yi Zhang, Hong-Hao Zhou

Abstract

The interpretation of equivocal Papanicolaou (Pap) smear results remains challenging, even with the addition of the high-risk human papillomavirus test (HPV-HR). Recently, methylated zinc finger protein 582 (ZNF582) (ZNF582 (m) ) was reported to be highly associated with cervical cancer. In this study, we compared the performance of ZNF582 (m) detection and HPV-HR genotyping in the triage of cervical atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and atypical squamous cell - cannot exclude a high-grade lesion (ASC-H). Two hundred and forty-two subjects with equivocal papanicolaou smear (Pap smear) results were recruited in this hospital-based and case-controlled study. The residual cervical cells in liquid-based cytological test (LBC) containers were used for genomic DNA extraction and then for ZNF582 (m) and HPV-HR detection. The level of ZNF582 (m) was quantified by real-time methylation-specific PCR after bisulfite conversion. The HPV-HR test was performed by using a nested multiplex PCR (NMPCR) assay that combines degenerate E6/E7 consensus primers and HPV type-specific primers. Significant associations were observed between ZNF582 (m) and the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN3+; odds ratio = 15.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 7.73 to 31.18). The sensitivity and specificity of ZNF582 (m) for women with CIN3+ were 82.43% and 76.79%, respectively. High sensitivity (99.33%) but low specificity (38.76%) was observed for HPV-HR. When combining both positive results of ZNF582 (m) and HPV-HR, the sensitivity and specificity were 82.43% and 81.55%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of ZNF582 (m) or HPV-16/18 were 89.19% and 70.24%, respectively. However, the sensitivity and specificity of ZNF582 (m) combined with HPV-16/18 (both ZNF582 (m) and HPV-16/18 positive results) were 59.46% and 94.64%, respectively. ZNF582 (m) provides a promising triage tool for women with ASC. To effectively manage ASC patients, a new strategy co-testing for ZNF582 (m) and HPV-16/18 genotyping was proposed. This strategy could reduce the number of patients referred for colposcopic examination and thus provide a feasible follow-up solution in the regions where colposcopy is not readily available. This strategy could also prevent women from experiencing unnecessary anxiety caused by HPV-HR.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 29%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 7 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 July 2019.
All research outputs
#3,575,584
of 15,448,191 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epigenetics
#205
of 805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,298
of 231,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epigenetics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,448,191 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 231,474 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them