Case of Paradoxical Cultural Sensitivity: Mixed Method Study of Web-Based Health Informational Materials About the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine in Israel

BACKGROUND

Designing web-based informational materials regarding the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has become a challenge for designers and decision makers in the health authorities because of the scientific and public controversy regarding the vaccine's safety and effectiveness and the sexual and moral concerns related to its use.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to investigate how cultural sensitivity (CS) is articulated in the explanatory informational materials on the HPV vaccine that are posted on the websites of the Israeli health authorities. In addition, the study examined the effect of transparency on the expression of CS in the informational materials.

METHODS

The study employed a quantitative and qualitative content analysis of the texts of explanatory informational materials published on the Arabic and Hebrew websites of the Israel Ministry of Health and the Clalit health maintenance organization (HMO).

RESULTS

The findings revealed the differences in the dimensions of CS (based on the CS model by Resnicow) between the informational materials targeting the majority Jewish population and those targeting the minority Arab population. Indeed, the research findings point to a paradox. On the one hand, the materials appealing to the conservative Arab population exhibited CS, in that the sexual context of the vaccine was missing. On the other hand, analysis of Resnicow's deep dimensions showed that disregarding the sexual context does not allow the relevant target audience to reflect on the barriers and concerns. In addition, the way the information was provided exhibited a lack of transparency regarding the CS dimensions (surface and deep).

CONCLUSIONS

The public health authorities have 2 main objectives in the context of vaccinations. One is to raise the vaccination rates and the other is to provide full and culturally sensitive information to give the public the tools to make intelligent decisions. The findings of this study indicated that despite the high uptake rate for HPV vaccination in the Arab population, the health authorities did not exercise full transparency and CS in transmitting the association between engaging in sexual relations and the necessity of the vaccination. Thus, the major challenge for the health authorities is to find ways to implement the objective of communicating information about the vaccination in a way that is transparent and culturally sensitive, even if this raises questions and fears among the public deriving from their culture.

Cancer and the LGBTQ Population: Quantitative and Qualitative Results from an Oncology Providers' Survey on Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Behaviors

Background: Despite growing social acceptance, the LGBTQ population continues to face barriers to healthcare including fear of stigmatization by healthcare providers, and providers’ lack of knowledge about LGBTQ-specific health issues. This analysis focuses on the assessment of quantitative and qualitative responses from a subset of providers who identified as specialists that treat one or more of the seven cancers that may be disproportionate in LGBTQ patients. Methods: A 32-item web-based survey was emailed to 388 oncology providers at a single institution. The survey assessed: demographics, knowledge, attitudes, and practice behaviors. Results: Oncology providers specializing in seven cancer types had poor knowledge of LGBTQ-specific health needs, with fewer than half of the surveyed providers (49.5%) correctly answering knowledge questions. Most providers had overall positive attitudes toward LGBTQ patients, with 91.7% agreeing they would be comfortable treating this population, and would support education and/or training on LGBTQ-related cancer health issues. Conclusion: Results suggest that despite generally positive attitudes toward the LGBTQ population, oncology providers who treat cancer types most prevalent among the population, lack knowledge of their unique health issues. Knowledge and practice behaviors may improve with enhanced education and training on this population’s specific needs.

Prevalence and risk factors associated with high-grade anal squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL)-AIN2 and HSIL-AIN3 in homosexual men

Background

Anal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (AIN2) and AIN grade 3 (AIN3) are commonly grouped together as high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL). We assessed risk factors for HSIL-AIN2 and HSIL-AIN3 in a cohort of homosexual men.

Methods

At the baseline visit in the Study for the Prevention of Anal Cancer (SPANC), all men completed a questionnaire and underwent anal swabbing for cytology and HPV genotyping, followed by high resolution anoscopy.

Results

Composite-HSIL prevalence was 47% and 32% among 220 HIV-positive and 396 HIV-negative men, respectively. HSIL-AIN3 (37.7% versus 24.7%; p<0.001), but not HSIL-AIN2 (9.5% versus 7.6%; p=0.395) was more common in HIV-positive men. Recent receptive anal partners (p-trend=0.045), and increasing number of high-risk (HR)-HPV types (p-trend<0.001) were associated with HSIL-AIN2. Lifetime receptive partners (p-trend<0.001), HIV status (OR 1.74; 95% CI: 1.05–2.87) and HPV16 (OR 3.00; 95% CI: 1.56–5.75) were associated with HSIL-AIN3. HPV16 was the most common HR-HPV type detected in men with HSIL-AIN3, both HIV-negative (61.1%) and HIV-positive (54.9%). HPV16 was less commonly detected in men with HSIL-AIN2.

Conclusions

Grouping HSIL-AIN2 and HSIL-AIN3 as HSIL may mask considerable heterogeneity in anal cancer risk. Given the strong link between HPV16 and anal cancer, men with HSIL-AIN3 and HPV16 are likely to be at greatest risk of cancer.

Monitoring the impact of HPV vaccine in males-Considerations and challenges

In this article, we examine the issues involved if national or sub-national programs are considering extending post HPV vaccine introduction monitoring to include males. Vaccination programs are now being extended to include males in some countries, in order to improve population level HPV infection control and to directly prevent HPV-related disease in males such as anogenital warts and anal cancers. Coverage and adverse events surveillance are essential components of post-vaccination monitoring. Monitoring the impact of vaccination on HPV infection and disease in men raises some similar challenges to monitoring in females, such as the long time frame until cancer outcomes, and also different ones given that genital specimens suitable for monitoring HPV prevalence are not routinely collected for other diagnostic or screening purposes in males. Thus, dedicated surveillance strategies must be designed; the framework of these may be country-specific, dependent upon the male population that is offered vaccination, the health care infrastructure and existing models of disease surveillance such as STI networks. The primary objective of any male HPV surveillance program will be to document changes in the prevalence of HPV infection and disease due to vaccine targeted HPV types occurring post vaccination. The full spectrum of outcomes to be considered for inclusion in any surveillance plan includes HPV prevalence monitoring, anogenital warts, potentially pre-cancerous lesions such as anal squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL), and cancers. Ideally, a combination of short term and long term outcome measures would be included. Surveillance over time in specific targeted populations of men who have sex with men and HIV-infected men (populations at high risk for HPV infection and associated disease) could be an efficient use of resources to demonstrate impact.

•

Males surveillance can provide information about both herd protection and direct impact.

•

Dedicated specimen collection is needed for HPV prevalence surveillance in males.

•

Anogenital wart monitoring is a useful early indicator of HPV vaccine impact.

•

Trends in HPV-related male cancers will be the ultimate indicator of success.

HPV prophylactic vaccines: lessons learned from 10 years experience

When HPV vaccines were registered in 2006/2007, it was unclear whether these new and type-specific prophylactic vaccines would be accepted by the community for cancer prevention. With an optimal vaccination age of early adolescence, three vaccine doses required, HPV a sexually transmitted infection, and secondary prevention already available in the form of cervical screening, considerable potential challenges were faced. At the time of licensing, vaccine efficacy in males and duration of immunity were not yet unknown. Almost a decade later, with over 230 million doses of the vaccines distributed worldwide and national HPV vaccination programs in place in many countries, it is timely to reflect on current knowledge about the vaccines and some of the lessons learned during implementation.

The epidemiology of cancers in human immunodeficiency virus infection and after organ transplantation

The authors provide an update on the association between immune deficiency and cancer risk in people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and in solid organ transplant recipients. Over the past decade, it has become clear that a wider range of about 20 mostly infection-related cancers occur at increased rates in people with immune deficiency. The human herpes virus 8 (HHV8) and Epstein Barr Virus (EBV)-related cancers of Kaposi sarcoma (KS) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) are most closely related to level of immune deficiency. Transplant recipients also have a greatly increased risk of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin, related to direct carcinogenic effects of the pharmaceuticals used for immune suppression. For those three cancer types, the increased cancer risk is largely reversed when immune deficiency is decreased by treatment of HIV or by reduction of iatrogenic immune suppression. Other infection-related cancers also occur at increased rates, but it is not clear whether reduction of immune deficiency reduces cancer risk. Prostate and breast cancer do not occur at increased rates, providing strong evidence that these cancers are unlikely to be related to infection. Epidemiological and clinical trends in these two populations have led to substantial recent changes in cancer occurrence.

Regional and national guideline recommendations for digital ano-rectal examination as a means for anal cancer screening in HIV positive men who have sex with men: a systematic review

Background

Although anal cancer is common in HIV positive men who have sex with men, few centres offer systematic screening. Regular digital ano-rectal examination (DARE) is a type of screening that has been recommended by some experts. How widely this forms part of HIV management guidelines is unclear.

Methods

The protocol was registered prospectively (CRD42013005188; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/). We systematically reviewed 121 regional and national HIV guidelines and searched for guidelines from http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/global?page=cr-00-04#SauguidelineX, PubMed and Web of Science databases up to 5^th August 2013 for recommendations of DARE as a means of anal cancer screening in HIV positive MSM. Guidelines were examined in detail if they were clinical guidelines, including both prevention and treatment protocols and were in English. Guidelines were excluded if they were restricted to limited areas (e.g. antiretroviral therapy only, children or pregnant women, strategies for prevention/testing). Information was extracted regarding recommendation of DARE as a screening method, the frequency of DARE recommended, target population for screening and the strength of evidence supporting this.

Results

30 regional and national guidelines were included and examined in detail. Only 2 recommended DARE. The ‘European AIDS Clinical Society Guidelines’ recommends DARE every 1–3 years for HIV positive MSM whilst the ‘US Guideline for prevention and treatment of opportunistic infections in HIV-infected adults and adolescents’ recommends an annual DARE for the HIV + population in general. None of these guidelines specify the age of commencing screening. In each case, the highest level of evidence supporting these two recommendations was expert opinion.

Conclusions

Few HIV guidelines discuss or recommend DARE as a means of anal cancer screening. Studies of the efficacy, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of DARE are needed to assess its role in anal cancer screening.

Australian sexually transmissible infection and HIV testing guidelines for asymptomatic men who have sex with men 2014: a review of the evidence

Men who have sex with men (MSM) in Australia and overseas are disproportionately affected by sexually transmissible infections (STIs), including HIV. Many STIs are asymptomatic, so regular testing and management of asymptomatic MSM remains an important component of effective control. We reviewed articles from January 2009–May 2013 to inform the 2014 update of the 2010 Australian testing guidelines for asymptomatic MSM. Key changes include: a recommendation for pharyngeal chlamydia (Chlamydia trachomatis) testing, use of nucleic acid amplification tests alone for gonorrhoea (Neisseria gonorrhoeae) testing (without gonococcal culture), more frequent (up to four times a year) gonorrhoea and chlamydia testing in sexually active HIV-positive MSM, time required since last void for chlamydia first-void urine collection specified at 20 min, urethral meatal swab as an alternative to first-void urine for urethral chlamydia testing, and the use of electronic reminders to increase STI and HIV retesting rates among MSM.

Why a special issue on anal cancer and what is in it?

This editorial describes the contents of this special issue of Sexual Health devoted to anal cancer. The aim of the issue is to provide readers with information to assist them in making decisions about what to do about detecting anal cancer early in men who have sex with men with HIV. Should they be advocating screening? It discusses the epidemiology of HPV infection, anal intraepithelial neoplasia, and anal cancer in MSM, heterosexual men and women; anal cancer screening and treatment of anal cancer. And most importantly, what should be done about vaccinating boys with the HPV vaccine.