Exploration of the effect of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in a cohort of pregnant women in Montreal, 2010-2016

Real-world impact and effectiveness of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine: an updated systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, which poses significant disease burden, is decreasing following implementation of vaccination programs. Synthesized evidence on HPV vaccine real-world benefit was published in 2016. However, long-term impact of vaccination, and how vaccination programs influence infection rates and disease outcomes, requires further examination.

AREAS COVERED

We systematically reviewed observational studies on HPV vaccination within MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar from 2016 to 2020, involving 14 years of follow-up data. We identified 138 peer-reviewed publications reporting HPV vaccine impact or effectiveness. Outcomes of interest included rates of infection at different anatomical sites and incidence of several HPV-related disease endpoints.

EXPERT OPINION

The expansion of HPV vaccination programs worldwide has led to a reduction in genital infection and significant decreases in incidence of HPV-related disease outcomes. Therefore, the WHO has set goals for the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health concern. To track progress toward this requires an understanding of the effectiveness of different vaccination initiatives. However, the impact on males, and potential benefit of gender-neutral vaccination programs have not been fully explored. To present an accurate commentary on the current outlook of vaccination and to help shape policy therefore requires a systematic review of available data.

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.

Update on Safety and Efficacy of HPV Vaccines: Focus on Gardasil

The human papillomavirus (HPV) is a highly contagious and prevalent virus that is primarily sexually transmitted. The Gardasil® quadrivalent vaccine, the Cevarix® bivalent vaccine and the Gardasil® 9 nonavalent vaccine were developed to prevent the spread of HPV as well as the incidence of its associated diseases. The aim of this mini-review is to critically analyze the safety and efficacy of both the Gardasil vaccines. A literature search was conducted on ProQuest, MedLine, Science Direct and Scopus databases. More than hundred articles were scanned, and from this, 38 most relevant papers involving human studies across several countries were closely reviewed. The literature deems the Gardasil® HPV vaccines to be safe and efficacious. Due to the novel nature of these vaccines, long-term efficacies, as well as their associated long-term adverse effects, are yet to be confirmed. Of some concern was the finding that a majority of these studies disclosed minor to major involvement with the vaccine manufacturers, and the inhibitory cost of use in developing nations. Gardasil is largely considered safe to use. However, considering that these vaccines are predominantly indicated for children, further comprehensive, impartial, and long-term studies are needed to critically assess safety and efficacy.

Systematic literature review of cross-protective effect of HPV vaccines based on data from randomized clinical trials and real-world evidence

BACKGROUND

The extent of cross-protection provided by currently licensed bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines versus direct protection against HPV 31-, 33-, 45-, 52-, and 58-related disease is debated. A systematic literature review was conducted to establish the duration and magnitude of cross-protection in interventional and observational studies.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies published between 2008 and 2019 reporting on efficacy and effectiveness of HPV vaccines in women against non-vaccine types 31, 33, 45, 52, 58, and 6 and 11 (non-bivalent types). Key outcomes of interest were vaccine efficacy against 6- and 12-month persistent infection or genital lesions, and type-specific genital HPV prevalence or incidence. RCT data were analyzed for the according-to-protocol (bivalent vaccine) or negative-for-14-HPV-types (quadrivalent vaccine) efficacy cohorts.

RESULTS

Data from 23 RCTs and 33 observational studies evaluating cross-protection were extracted. RCTs assessed cross-protection in post-hoc analyses of small size subgroups. Among fully vaccinated, baseline HPV-naïve women, the bivalent vaccine showed statistically significant cross-protective efficacy, although with wide confidence intervals, against 6-month and 12-month persistent cervical infections and CIN2+ only consistently for HPV 31 and 45, with the highest effect observed for HPV 31 (range 64.6% [95% CI: 27.6 to 83.9] to 79.1% [97.7% CI: 27.6 to 95.9] for 6-month persistent infection; maximal follow-up 4.7 years). No cross-protection was shown in extended follow-up. The quadrivalent vaccine efficacy reached statistical significance for HPV 31 (46.2% [15.3-66.4]; follow-up: 3.6 years). Similarly, observational studies found consistently significant effectiveness only against HPV 31 and 45 with both vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs and observational studies show that cross-protection is inconsistent across non-vaccine HPV types and is largely driven by HPV 31 and 45. Furthermore, existing data suggest that it wanes over time; its long-term durability has not been established.

Effect of indole-3-carbinol on transcriptional profiling of wound-healing genes in macrophages of systemic lupus erythematosus patients: an RNA sequencing assay

BACKGROUND

Relapses and flares with delayed wound healing are among the main symptoms of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), a rheumatic autoimmune disease. The orientation of immune responses in SLE disease depends on the function of the population of macrophages. This study investigated the effect of indole-3-carbinol (I3C) on transcriptional profiling of macrophage-derived monocytes (MDMs) in four stages of the wound-healing process.

METHODS

In the first phase of study, MDMs were generated from peripheral blood mononuclear cells of three new SLE cases (unmedicated) and two healthy controls. The cases and controls were then divided into I3C treated and untreated groups after 24 hours of exposure to I3C. Single-end RNA sequencing was performed using an Illumina NextSeq 500 platform. After comprehensive analysis among differentially expressed genes, CDKN1A, FN1 and MMP15 were validated by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction as upregulated ranked genes involved in wound-healing stages.

RESULTS

The RNA sequencing analysis of treated cases and treated controls versus untreated cases and untreated controls (group 3 vs. group 4) revealed upregulation of various genes, for example: C1S, C1R, IGKV1-5, IGKV4-1, SERPING1, IGLC1 and IGLC2 in coagulation; ADAM19, CEACAM1 and CEACAM8 in M2 reprogramming; IRS1, FN1, THBS1 and LIMS2 in extracellular matrix organization; and STAT1, THBS1 and ATP2A3 in the proliferation stage of wound healing.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that treatment with I3C could modulate the gene expression involved in wound healing in SLE cases and healthy controls.