Consistency evaluation of Liferiver, Yaneng, Darui, and the Cobas 4800 test for high‐risk human papillomavirus screening

Background In recent years, several high‐risk human papillomavirus (HR‐HPV) tests have been developed. The assay capabilities need to be systematically reviewed. Here, we compared the clinical sample performance of three novel HR‐HPV assays (Liferiver, Yaneng, and Darui) based on different platforms with the widely adopted cobas4800 test. Methods A total of 346 cervical swabs from women who were screened for cervical cancer were analyzed for the presence of 14 HR‐HPV genotypes. The distinction between the four assays was investigated by the genotyping and direct sequencing. Results The positive rates of the four assays ranged from 61.56% to 64.16%. The overall concordance was 88.15%. The Yaneng assays displayed the best sensitivity (100%) and specificity (98.43%). The sensitivity (98.17%) and specificity (98.43%) of the Darui assay were superior to those of the cobas4800 test (97.72% and 93.70%, respectively). The Liferiver assay displayed comparable sensitivity with the cobas4800 test (95.89% and 97.72%, respectively). The specificity of the cobas4800 was lower than that of the Liferiver assay (93.70% vs. 97.64%). Conclusions The three novel HR‐HPV assays displayed good agreement with the cobas4800 test. The analytical performance of all four fulfilled the requirements of sensitivity and specificity for HR‐HPV detection.
In this research, we have compared the clinical sample performance of three novel HR‐HPV assays (Liferiver, Yaneng, and Darui) based on different platforms with the widely adopted cobas4800 test, and the distinction between the four assays was investigated by the genotyping and direct sequencing.