Surveillance of effects of HPV vaccination in Belgium

An economic evaluation of two cervical screening algorithms in Belgium: HR-HPV primary compared to HR-HPV and liquid-based cytology co-testing

OBJECTIVE

To assess the costs and benefits of two algorithms for cervical cancer screening in Belgium (1) high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) primary screening and (2) HR-HPV and liquid-based cytology (LBC) co-testing.

METHODS

A decision tree was adapted from published work and parameterised using HORIZON study data and Belgian cost and population data. The theoretical model represents two different screening algorithms for a cohort of 577 846 women aged 25-64 attending routine cervical screening. Scenario analyses were used to explore the impact of including vaccinated women and alternative pricing approaches. Uncertainty analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The cost per woman screened was €113.50 for HR-HPV primary screening and €101.70 for co-testing, representing a total cost of €65 588 573 and €58 775 083, respectively, for the cohort; a 10% difference. For one screening cycle, compared to HR-HPV primary, co-testing resulted in 13 173 more colposcopies, 67 731 more HR-HPV tests and 477 020 more LBC tests. Co-testing identified 2351 more CIN2+ cases per year (27% more than HR-HPV primary) and 1602 more CIN3+ cases (24% more than HR-HPV primary) than HR-HPV primary.

CONCLUSION

In Belgium, a co-testing algorithm could increase cervical pre-cancer detection rates compared to HR-HPV primary. Co-testing would cost less than HR-HPV primary if the cost of the HPV test and LBC were cost-neutral compared to the current cost of LBC screening but would cost more if the cost per HPV test and LBC were the same in both co-testing and HR-HPV primary strategies.

Safety, Efficacy, and Immunogenicity of Therapeutic Vaccines for Patients with High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN 2/3) Associated with Human Papillomavirus: A Systematic Review

Despite the knowledge that HPV is responsible for high-grade CIN and cervical cancer, little is known about the use of therapeutic vaccines as a treatment. We aimed to synthesize and critically evaluate the evidence from clinical trials on the safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of therapeutic vaccines in the treatment of patients with high-grade CIN associated with HPV. A systematic review of clinical trials adhering to the PRISMA 2020 statement in MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and LILACS was undertaken, with no data or language restrictions. Primary endpoints related to the safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of these vaccines were assessed by reviewing the adverse/toxic effects associated with the therapeutic vaccine administration via histopathological regression of the lesion and/or regression of the lesion size and via viral clearance and through the immunological response of individuals who received treatment compared to those who did not or before and after receiving the vaccine, respectively. A total of 1184 studies were identified, and 16 met all the criteria. Overall, the therapeutic vaccines were heterogeneous regarding their formulation, dose, intervention protocol, and routes of administration, making a meta-analysis unfeasible. In most studies (n = 15), the vaccines were safe and well tolerated, with clinical efficacy regarding the lesions and histopathological regression or viral clearance. In addition, eleven studies showed favorable immunological responses against HPV, and seven studies showed a positive correlation between immunogenicity and the clinical response, indicating promising results that should be further investigated. In summary, therapeutic vaccines, although urgently needed to avoid progression of CIN 2/3 patients, still present sparse data, requiring greater investments in a well-designed phase III RCT.

Evolution of human papilloma virus prevalence in a highly vaccinated region in Belgium: a retrospective cohort study in Flemish women (2010-2019)

OBJECTIVE

In order to lower the incidence of cervical cancer, vaccines against high-risk types of the human papilloma virus (hrHPV) were approved and brought on the market in 2007, with a partial reimbursement for Belgian citizens younger than 18 years old. Since 2010, a school-based vaccination program ensures a high vaccination coverage in young women. In this study, the impact of the Belgian vaccination program on the prevalence of HPV 16/18 is studied, together with the evolution of the prevalence of other hrHPV types and precancerous lesions.

METHODS

Results of HPV typing and cytology in papanicolaou-smears from women aged 20-23 years taken between 2010 and 2019 were used. An older, nonvaccinated group of women of 40-45 years old served as a control group.

RESULTS

A significant decrease in prevalence of HPV types 16 and 18 was found in the 20-23-years-old women, whereas no decrease was found in the age group 40-45. Alongside this decrease, a significant decrease in prevalence of subtypes 6, 11 and 31 was observed, whereas type 31 is not included in the administered vaccines. Remarkably, there was no decrease in prevalence of cytological abnormalities in the study group during this study. There was even an increase in prevalence of high-risk types 53, 58 and 67.

CONCLUSION

These findings emphasise the need to maintain the screening programs, even in areas with high vaccination coverage.

Real-world impact and effectiveness assessment of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine: a systematic review of study designs and data sources

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine effectiveness and impact studies are typically observational, generating evidence after vaccine launch in a real-world setting. For human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination studies, the variety of data sources and methods used is pronounced. Careful selection of study design, data capture and analytical methods can mitigate potential bias in such studies.

AREAS COVERED

We systematically reviewed the different study designs, methods, and data sources in published evidence (1/2007-3/2020), which assessed the quadrivalent HPV vaccine effectiveness and impact on cervical/cervicovaginal, anal, and oral HPV infections, anogenital warts, lesions in anus, cervix, oropharynx, penis, vagina or vulva, and recurrent respiratory papillomatosis.

EXPERT OPINION

The rapid growth in access to real-world data allows global monitoring of effects of different public health interventions, including HPV vaccination programs. But the use of data which are not collected or organized to support research also underscore a need to develop robust methodology that provides insight of vaccine effects and consequences of different health policy decisions. To achieve the WHO elimination goal, we foresee a growing need to evaluate HPV vaccination programs globally. A critical appraisal summary of methodology used will provide timely guidance to researchers who want to initiate research activities in various settings.

The integration of the global HIV/AIDS response into universal health coverage: desirable, perhaps possible, but far from easy

BACKGROUND

The international community's health focus is shifting from achieving disease-specific targets towards aiming for universal health coverage. Integrating the global HIV/AIDS response into universal health coverage may be inevitable to secure its achievements in the long run, and for expanding these achievements beyond addressing a single disease. However, this integration comes at a time when international financial support for the global HIV/AIDS response is declining, while political support for universal health coverage is not translated into financial support. To assess the risks, challenges and opportunities of the integration of the global HIV/AIDS response into national universal health coverage plans, we carried out assessments in Indonesia, Kenya, Uganda and Ukraine, based on key informant interviews with civil society, policy-makers and development partners, as well as on a review of grey and academic literature.

RESULTS

In the absence of international financial support, governments are turning towards national health insurance schemes to finance universal health coverage, making access to healthcare contingent on regular financial contributions. It is not clear how AIDS treatment will be fit in. While the global HIV/AIDS response accords special attention to exclusion due to sexual orientation and gender identity, sex work or drug use, efforts to achieve universal health coverage focus on exclusion due to poverty, gender and geographical inequalities. Policies aiming for universal health coverage try to include private healthcare providers in the health system, which could create a sustainable framework for civil society organisations providing HIV/AIDS-related services. While the global HIV/AIDS response insisted on the inclusion of civil society in decision-making policies, that is not (yet) the case for policies aiming for universal health coverage.

DISCUSSION

While there are many obstacles to successful integration of the global HIV/AIDS response into universal health coverage policies, integration seems inevitable and is happening. Successful integration will require expanding the principle of 'shared responsibility' which emerged with the global HIV/AIDS response to universal health coverage, rather than relying solely on domestic efforts for universal health coverage. The preference for national health insurance as the best way to achieve universal health coverage should be reconsidered. An alliance between HIV/AIDS advocates and proponents of universal health coverage requires mutual condemnation of discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, sex work or drug use, as well as addressing of exclusion based on poverty and other factors. The fulfilment of the promise to include civil society in decision-making processes about universal health coverage is long overdue.

Cervical Cancer Screening Programs in Europe: The Transition Towards HPV Vaccination and Population-Based HPV Testing

Cervical cancer is the fourth most frequently occurring cancer in women around the world and can affect them during their reproductive years. Since the development of the Papanicolaou (Pap) test, screening has been essential in identifying cervical cancer at a treatable stage. With the identification of the human papillomavirus (HPV) as the causative agent of essentially all cervical cancer cases, HPV molecular screening tests and HPV vaccines for primary prevention against the virus have been developed. Accordingly, comparative studies were designed to assess the performance of cervical cancer screening methods in order to devise the best screening strategy possible. This review critically assesses the current cervical cancer screening methods as well as the implementation of HPV vaccination in Europe. The most recent European Guidelines and recommendations for organized population-based programs with HPV testing as the primary screening method are also presented. Lastly, the current landscape of cervical cancer screening programs is assessed for both European Union member states and some associated countries, in regard to the transition towards population-based screening programs with primary HPV testing.

Efficacy and safety of prophylactic HPV vaccines. A Cochrane review of randomized trials

INTRODUCTION

Recently, the evidence on efficacy and safety of prophylactic HPV vaccines derived from randomized trials was published in the Cochrane database of Systematic reviews. A summary of this Cochrane review is presented below.

AREAS COVERED

Only trials involving mono-, bi-, and quadrivalent HPV vaccines were included. Trials evaluating the nonavalent vaccine were excluded since women in the control group received the quadrivalent vaccine. Main efficacy outcomes were: histologically confirmed cervical precancer lesions distinguishing those associated with vaccine HPV types and any cervical precancer. Exposure groups were: women aged: 15-26 or 24-45 years being initially negative for high-risk HPV (hrHPV) or negative for the vaccine types and women unselected by HPV status.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

All evaluated vaccines offered excellent protection against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or 3 (CIN2 or CIN3) and adenocarcinoma in situ associated with HPV16/18 infection in young women who were not initially infected with hrHPV or HPV16/18. Vaccine efficacy was lower when all women regardless of HPV DNA status at enrollment were included. In young women, HPV vaccination protected also against any cervical precancer but the magnitude of protection was lower than against HPV16/18 associated cervical precancer. Vaccine efficacy was lower in mid-adult (aged 24-45 years) women. No protection against cervical precancer was found in mid-adult women unselected by HPV DNA status at enrollment. Trials were not empowered to address protection against cervical cancer. Occurrence of severe adverse events or adverse pregnancy outcomes was not significantly higher in recipients of HPV vaccines than in women included in the control arms.

Prophylactic vaccination against human papillomaviruses to prevent cervical cancer and its precursors

BACKGROUND

Persistent infection with high-risk human papillomaviruses (hrHPV) types is causally linked with the development of cervical precancer and cancer. HPV types 16 and 18 cause approximately 70% of cervical cancers worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the harms and protection of prophylactic human papillomaviruses (HPV) vaccines against cervical precancer and HPV16/18 infection in adolescent girls and women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Embase (June 2017) for reports on effects from trials. We searched trial registries and company results' registers to identify unpublished data for mortality and serious adverse events.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing efficacy and safety in females offered HPV vaccines with placebo (vaccine adjuvants or another control vaccine).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane methodology and GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence for protection against cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and above [CIN2+], CIN grade 3 and above [CIN3+], and adenocarcinoma-in-situ [AIS]), and for harms. We distinguished between the effects of vaccines by participants' baseline HPV DNA status. The outcomes were precancer associated with vaccine HPV types and precancer irrespective of HPV type. Results are presented as risks in control and vaccination groups and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals in brackets.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 trials (73,428 participants). Ten trials, with follow-up of 1.3 to 8 years, addressed protection against CIN/AIS. Vaccine safety was evaluated over a period of 6 months to 7 years in 23 studies. Studies were not large enough or of sufficient duration to evaluate cervical cancer outcomes. All but one of the trials was funded by the vaccine manufacturers. We judged most included trials to be at low risk of bias. Studies involved monovalent (N = 1), bivalent (N = 18), and quadrivalent vaccines (N = 7). Most women were under 26 years of age. Three trials recruited women aged 25 and over. We summarize the effects of vaccines in participants who had at least one immunisation.Efficacy endpoints by initial HPV DNA statushrHPV negativeHPV vaccines reduce CIN2+, CIN3+, AIS associated with HPV16/18 compared with placebo in adolescent girls and women aged 15 to 26. There is high-certainty evidence that vaccines lower CIN2+ from 164 to 2/10,000 (RR 0.01 (0 to 0.05)) and CIN3+ from 70 to 0/10,000 (RR 0.01 (0.00 to 0.10). There is moderate-certainty evidence that vaccines reduce the risk of AIS from 9 to 0/10,000 (RR 0.10 (0.01 to 0.82).HPV vaccines reduce the risk of any CIN2+ from 287 to 106/10,000 (RR 0.37 (0.25 to 0.55), high certainty) and probably reduce any AIS lesions from 10 to 0/10,000 (RR 0.1 (0.01 to 0.76), moderate certainty). The size of reduction in CIN3+ with vaccines differed between bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines (bivalent: RR 0.08 (0.03 to 0.23), high certainty; quadrivalent: RR 0.54 (0.36 to 0.82), moderate certainty). Data in older women were not available for this comparison.HPV16/18 negativeIn those aged 15 to 26 years, vaccines reduce CIN2+ associated with HPV16/18 from 113 to 6 /10,000 (RR 0.05 (0.03 to 0.10). In women 24 years or older the absolute and relative reduction in the risk of these lesions is smaller (from 45 to 14/10,000, (RR 0.30 (0.11 to 0.81), moderate certainty). HPV vaccines reduce the risk of CIN3+ and AIS associated with HPV16/18 in younger women (RR 0.05 (0.02 to 0.14), high certainty and RR 0.09 (0.01 to 0.72), moderate certainty, respectively). No trials in older women have measured these outcomes.Vaccines reduce any CIN2+ from 231 to 95/10,000, (RR 0.41 (0.32 to 0.52)) in younger women. No data are reported for more severe lesions.Regardless of HPV DNA statusIn younger women HPV vaccines reduce the risk of CIN2+ associated with HPV16/18 from 341 to 157/10,000 (RR 0.46 (0.37 to 0.57), high certainty). Similar reductions in risk were observed for CIN3+ associated with HPV16/18 (high certainty). The number of women with AIS associated with HPV16/18 is reduced from 14 to 5/10,000 with HPV vaccines (high certainty).HPV vaccines reduce any CIN2+ from 559 to 391/10,000 (RR 0.70 (0.58 to 0.85, high certainty) and any AIS from 17 to 5/10,000 (RR 0.32 (0.15 to 0.67), high certainty). The reduction in any CIN3+ differed by vaccine type (bivalent vaccine: RR 0.55 (0.43 to 0.71) and quadrivalent vaccine: RR 0.81 (0.69 to 0.96)).In women vaccinated at 24 to 45 years of age, there is moderate-certainty evidence that the risks of CIN2+ associated with HPV16/18 and any CIN2+ are similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated women (RR 0.74 (0.52 to 1.05) and RR 1.04 (0.83 to 1.30) respectively). No data are reported in this age group for CIN3+ or AIS.Adverse effectsThe risk of serious adverse events is similar between control and HPV vaccines in women of all ages (669 versus 656/10,000, RR 0.98 (0.92 to 1.05), high certainty). Mortality was 11/10,000 in control groups compared with 14/10,000 (9 to 22) with HPV vaccine (RR 1.29 [0.85 to 1.98]; low certainty). The number of deaths was low overall but there is a higher number of deaths in older women. No pattern in the cause or timing of death has been established.Pregnancy outcomesAmong those who became pregnant during the studies, we did not find an increased risk of miscarriage (1618 versus 1424/10,000, RR 0.88 (0.68 to 1.14), high certainty) or termination (931 versus 838/10,000 RR 0.90 (0.80 to 1.02), high certainty). The effects on congenital abnormalities and stillbirths are uncertain (RR 1.22 (0.88 to 1.69), moderate certainty and (RR 1.12 (0.68 to 1.83), moderate certainty, respectively).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that HPV vaccines protect against cervical precancer in adolescent girls and young women aged 15 to 26. The effect is higher for lesions associated with HPV16/18 than for lesions irrespective of HPV type. The effect is greater in those who are negative for hrHPV or HPV16/18 DNA at enrolment than those unselected for HPV DNA status. There is moderate-certainty evidence that HPV vaccines reduce CIN2+ in older women who are HPV16/18 negative, but not when they are unselected by HPV DNA status.We did not find an increased risk of serious adverse effects. Although the number of deaths is low overall, there were more deaths among women older than 25 years who received the vaccine. The deaths reported in the studies have been judged not to be related to the vaccine. Increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes after HPV vaccination cannot be excluded, although the risk of miscarriage and termination are similar between trial arms. Long-term of follow-up is needed to monitor the impact on cervical cancer, occurrence of rare harms and pregnancy outcomes.

Who's Not Protected in the Herd? Factors Associated with Vaccine-Type HPV in Unvaccinated Women

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Evidence suggests that vaccine-type human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence may decrease in unvaccinated women after HPV vaccine introduction, indicating herd protection. The aim of this study was to determine factors associated with vaccine-type HPV (i.e. absence of herd protection) after vaccine introduction.

DESIGN

We conducted three cross-sectional studies from 2006-2014 (n = 1180): wave 1 (2006-2007), wave 2 (2009-2010), and wave 3 (2013-2014).

SETTING

Participants were recruited from a hospital-based teen health center and a community health department.

PARTICIPANTS

We recruited 13-26 year-old young women; those included in this analysis had not received an HPV vaccine.

INTERVENTIONS AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measure was infection with at least one vaccine-type HPV (HPV6, 11, 16, 18).

RESULTS

Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that in wave 1 (before vaccine introduction), history of anal intercourse (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.1-3.0), age 18-21 vs 13-17 years (OR = 2.1, CI = 1.2-3.6), and Black/multiracial vs White race (OR = 1.8, CI = 1.1-3.0) were associated with vaccine-type HPV in unvaccinated women. In wave 2, no variables were associated with HPV. In wave 3, sexually transmitted infection history (OR = 3.6, CI = 1.3-9.7) was associated with HPV.

CONCLUSION

We did not identify a consistent set of modifiable risk factors associated with vaccine-type HPV after vaccine introduction across the three study waves, underscoring the urgency of vaccination for primary HPV prevention and the limitations of relying on herd protection.

Human papillomavirus vaccination coverage in Luxembourg - Implications of lowering and restricting target age groups

BACKGROUND

In Luxembourg, a national Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme was introduced in 2008, targeting 12-17 year old girls offering a choice of bivalent or quadrivalent vaccine free of charge. In 2015, the programme was changed offering the bivalent vaccine only to 11-13 year old girls. The aim of this study was to evaluate the HPV vaccination coverage, to assess the impact of age target changes and compare vaccination coverage to other European countries.

METHODS

Anonymous HPV vaccination records consisting of individual vaccine doses obtained free of charge in pharmacies between 2008 and 2016 were extracted from the Luxembourgish Social Security database. Additional aggregate tables by nationality and municipality were analysed.

RESULTS

Of the target cohort of 39,610 girls born between 1991 and 2003 residing in Luxembourg, 24,550 (62.0%) subjects obtained at least one dose, 22,082 (55.7%) obtained at least two doses, and 17,197 (43.4%) obtained three doses of HPV vaccine. The mean age at first dose was 13.7 years during 2008-14 and 12.7 years in 2016 after the age target change. Coverage varied significantly by nationality (p < 0.0001): Portuguese (80%), former Yugoslavs (74%), Luxembourgish (54%), Belgian (52%), German (47%), French (39%) and other nationalities (51%). Coverage varied also by geographical region, with lower rates (<50%) noted in some Northern and Central areas of Luxembourg (range: 38% to 78%).

CONCLUSION

Overall HPV vaccination coverage in Luxembourg is moderate and varied by nationality and region. The policy changes in 2015 did not have a substantial impact except lowering age at initiating vaccination. Options to improve coverage deserve further investigation.

The role of human papillomavirus vaccines in cervical cancer: Prevention and treatment

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted disease, worldwide. Primary prevention thorough vaccination si able to reduce the burden of HPV-related lesions. Ten years ago the Food and drug Administration (FDA) approved the first vaccine against HPV. In the last decades, growing data on safety and effectiveness have been collected. In the present review we report the current knowledge on vaccine against HPV, highlighting the current value and prospective regarding the widespread diffusion of HPV vaccines. The role of emerging therapeutic vaccines is reviewed.

Cervical morbidity in Alsace, France: results from a regional organized cervical cancer screening program

In 1994, a pilot program of cervical cancer screening was introduced in the Alsace region, France. Women aged 25-65 years were proposed to have one Pap smear every 3 years. The objective was to assess cervical morbidity in Alsace before the human papillomavirus vaccinated population reaches the age of screening. Data on cervical lesions and cancers were collected by EVE for the period September 2008 to August 2011 from existing medical services and cytopathology laboratories in Alsace. Cytological and histological data were completed with data from the two cancer registries covering the region (Bas-Rhin and Haut-Rhin). Cancer incidence rates were computed for the target population (truncated to 25-64 years) and were age standardized according to the world reference population. World standardized incidence rates for the whole female population were obtained from the two cancer registries. During 2008-2011, 565 153 smears were performed in 498 913 women aged 25-64 years, representing an average of 1.13 smears/woman and 1.62 smears/screened woman. The overall screening coverage was 70.1% over the 3-year period. Histologically confirmed high-grade lesions were found in 2303 women (0.5%). Moreover, 215 cervical cancers were reported among women aged 25-64 years (crude and standardized truncated incidence rate of 10.6 and 10.0/100 000 women-years, respectively). The overall screening coverage of 70% at 3 years is higher than the national rate (57%), and the overall cancer incidence of 5.5/100 000 is below the national French level. The EVE database will be useful to assess trends in cervical morbidity over time and to further assess the effect of screening as well as of human papillomavirus vaccination.