Maternal HPV Infection and the Estimated Risks for Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes—A Systematic Review

Is there a need for screening of cervical HPV infections and carcinoma?

Antenatal cervical screening aims to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasms as precancerous lesions and invasive cervical cancer. Whether this screening is performed routinely during pregnancy varies depending on each country's screening participation rates, guidelines, and the risks to the pregnant woman. In some countries with the high rate of routinely implemented cervical screening among the target women, women are recommended to defer cervical screening intentionally to post-delivery, though having screening in consultation with physicians may be possible if routine screening overlaps. However, when cervical screening rate in fertile women is low and the incidence of cervical cancer is high, cervical screening during pregnancy may play an important role in the early detection of cervical cancer. Cervical screening using high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is accepted worldwide as a highly sensitive and objective test method, and it should replace traditional primary cervical cytology in the future. However, the benefits and disadvantages of using HPV testing in pregnant women is unclear because a false positive rate may be increased due to pregnant women being generally under an immunosuppressed condition.

The quality of life of frequently vs. infrequently screened HPV vaccinated women

PURPOSE

Cervical lesions caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) are related to decreased quality of life (QoL) of women. Also, cervical cancer (CC) screening can cause psychological adverse effects. It has been assumed that by decreasing the HPV-related disease burden, HPV vaccinations would increase the QoL. This study compares the effect of CC screening on QoL of HPV vaccinated women in two different screening protocols.

METHODS

A total of 753 HPV16/18 vaccinated women were randomized to frequent (22/25/28 years of age) and infrequent (28 years of age) CC screening arms. QoL questionnaires (EQ VAS, RAND 36, amended CECA 10) were sent at the age of 28.

RESULTS

Median EQ VAS scores were 80 (Q1-Q3 75-90) in both screening arms. Mean RAND 36 scores of frequently and infrequently screened women were 78.13/81.64 in Physical role functioning domain and, respectively, 77.93/80.18 in Pain, 69.10/69.12 in General Health, 54.67/53.61 in Energy, 83.72/85.11 in Social functioning, 69.53/69.68 in Emotional role functioning, and 68.16/69.29 in Emotional well-being domain. Among women with a self-reported history of Pap cytology abnormalities, overall mean scores of amended CECA 10 were 69.52/72.07, and among women with a self-reported history of genital warts, 60.09/66.73, respectively.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in the QoL of HPV vaccinated women between the two CC screening arms. Women were mostly satisfied with the screening experience despite the screening frequency. This information is important for the future screening program planning as we need to reach the best possible balance with screening benefits and harms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02149030, date of registration 29/5/2014.

Seminal human papillomavirus infection: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is one of the most prevalent sexually transmitted infections that can lead to malignant pathologies as well as fertility problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of HPV infection in males, its impact on semen parameters, and reproductive consequences. We also evaluated potential measures that could prevent negative outcomes of HPV infection in males.

METHODS

A systematic literature search using PubMed/Medline and Embase databases was performed to search for English articles published until July 2023. We explored three different aspects: (1) prevalence of HPV semen infection and its impact on seminal parameters; (2) the relationship between HPV semen infection and infertility risk and reproductive outcomes; and (3) potential measures that could prevent the negative outcomes related to HPV seminal infection. The identified studies were first screened and assessed independently by one author, and then validated by two additional authors. Data were extracted from 19 studies.

RESULTS

The prevalence of seminal HPV infection was higher among infertile males. In addition to controversies about the real interference of seminal HPV infection on sperm parameters, a growing number of studies have demonstrated a correlation between unexplained infertility and seminal HPV infection. Semen HPV infection is also associated with lower rates of pregnancy and higher rates of miscarriage. Prevention measures such as HPV vaccination seem promising.

CONCLUSION

Further studies are required to confirm not only the association between HPV infection and reproductive outcomes but also the benefit of preventive measures.