-
Vaccine Sep 2022Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines were first licensed as a three-dose series. Two doses are now widely recommended in some age groups; there are data suggesting high... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines were first licensed as a three-dose series. Two doses are now widely recommended in some age groups; there are data suggesting high efficacy with one dose. We updated a systematic literature review of HPV vaccine effectiveness by number of doses in observational studies.
METHODS
We searched Medline and Embase databases from January 1, 2007, through September 29, 2021. Data were extracted and summarized in a narrative synthesis. We also conducted quality assessments for bias due to selection, information, and confounding.
RESULTS
Overall, 35 studies were included; all except one were conducted within the context of a recommended three-dose schedule. Evaluations were in countries that used bivalent HPV vaccine (seven), quadrivalent HPV vaccine (27) or both (one). Nine evaluated effectiveness against HPV infection, ten anogenital warts, and 16 cervical abnormalities. All studies were judged to have moderate or serious risk of bias. The biases rated as serious would likely result in lower effectiveness with fewer doses. Investigators attempted to control for or stratify by potentially important variables, such as age at vaccination. Eight studies evaluated impact of buffer periods (lag time) for case counting and 10 evaluated different intervals between doses for two-dose vaccine recipients. Studies that stratified by vaccination age found higher effectiveness with younger age at vaccination, although differences were not all formally tested. Most studies found highest estimates of effectiveness with three doses; significant effectiveness was found among 28/29 studies that evaluated three doses, 19/29 that evaluated two doses, and 18/30 that evaluated one dose. Some studies that adjusted or stratified analyses by age at vaccination found similar effectiveness with three, two and one doses.
CONCLUSION
Observational studies of HPV vaccine effectiveness have many biases. Studies examining persons vaccinated prior to sexual activity and using methods to reduce sources of bias are needed for valid effectiveness estimates.
Topics: Alphapapillomavirus; Female; Humans; Immunization Programs; Papillomavirus Infections; Papillomavirus Vaccines; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Vaccination; Vaccine Efficacy
PubMed: 35965239
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.06.065 -
Sexually Transmitted Diseases Jun 2021No clear guidelines are available for the management of pregnant women with condyloma acuminata, a human papillomavirus-associated benign neoplasm that develops in the...
No clear guidelines are available for the management of pregnant women with condyloma acuminata, a human papillomavirus-associated benign neoplasm that develops in the genital tract. We performed a systematic review to gain a better understanding of the management of condyloma acuminata during pregnancy. In this review, we mainly focused on treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science to identify studies on the treatment of condyloma acuminata during pregnancy. Thirty articles met the inclusion criteria. The treatment methods described in the literature were laser therapy, cryotherapy, imiquimod, photodynamic therapy, trichloroacetic acid, and local hyperthermia. The most effective treatment remains unclear. Various factors must be considered when deciding how to treat. Based on our assessment of the literature, we recommend cryotherapy as the first-choice treatment and laser therapy as the second-choice treatment. Imiquimod can be considered in cases such as extensive condyloma acuminata that is not easily treated by cryotherapy or laser therapy. In such cases, sufficient informed consent must be obtained from the patient. Cryotherapy, laser therapy, and imiquimod have been administered during all 3 trimesters with no severe adverse effects, but we cautiously recommend reserving laser therapy until the third trimester because of the lower risk of recurrence before delivery. There are still many unclear points regarding the management of condyloma in pregnancy, and further research is needed.
Topics: Condylomata Acuminata; Female; Humans; Imiquimod; Papillomaviridae; Photochemotherapy; Pregnancy; Recurrence
PubMed: 33093288
DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001322 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2019Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine remains low in many countries, although the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines given as a three-dose schedule are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine remains low in many countries, although the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines given as a three-dose schedule are effective in the prevention of precancerous lesions of the cervix in women. Simpler immunisation schedules, such as those with fewer doses, might reduce barriers to vaccination, as may programmes that include males.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and harms of different dose schedules and different types of HPV vaccines in females and males.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted electronic searches on 27 September 2018 in Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (in the Cochrane Library), and Ovid Embase. We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov (both 27 September 2018), vaccine manufacturer websites, and checked reference lists from an index of HPV studies and other relevant systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with no language restriction. We considered studies if they enrolled HIV-negative males or females aged 9 to 26 years, or HIV-positive males or females of any age.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used methods recommended by Cochrane. We use the term 'control' to refer to comparator products containing an adjuvant or active vaccine and 'placebo' to refer to products that contain no adjuvant or active vaccine. Most primary outcomes in this review were clinical outcomes. However, for comparisons comparing dose schedules, the included RCTs were designed to measure antibody responses (i.e. immunogenicity) as the primary outcome, rather than clinical outcomes, since it is unethical to collect cervical samples from girls under 16 years of age. We analysed immunogenicity outcomes (i.e. geometric mean titres) with ratios of means, clinical outcomes (e.g. cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia) with risk ratios or rate ratios and, for serious adverse events and deaths, we calculated odds ratios. We rated the certainty of evidence with GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 20 RCTs with 31,940 participants. The length of follow-up in the included studies ranged from seven months to five years. Two doses versus three doses of HPV vaccine in 9- to 15-year-old females Antibody responses after two-dose and three-dose HPV vaccine schedules were similar after up to five years of follow-up (4 RCTs, moderate- to high-certainty evidence). No RCTs collected clinical outcome data. Evidence about serious adverse events in studies comparing dose schedules was of very low-certainty owing to imprecision and indirectness (three doses 35/1159; two doses 36/1158; 4 RCTs). One death was reported in the three-dose group (1/898) and none in the two-dose group (0/899) (low-certainty evidence). Interval between doses of HPV vaccine in 9- to 14-year-old females and males Antibody responses were stronger with a longer interval (6 or 12 months) between the first two doses of HPV vaccine than a shorter interval (2 or 6 months) at up to three years of follow-up (4 RCTs, moderate- to high-certainty evidence). No RCTs collected data about clinical outcomes. Evidence about serious adverse events in studies comparing intervals was of very low-certainty, owing to imprecision and indirectness. No deaths were reported in any of the studies (0/1898, 3 RCTs, low-certainty evidence). HPV vaccination of 10- to 26-year-old males In one RCT there was moderate-certainty evidence that quadrivalent HPV vaccine, compared with control, reduced the incidence of external genital lesions (control 36 per 3081 person-years; quadrivalent 6 per 3173 person-years; rate ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38; 6254 person-years) and anogenital warts (control 28 per 2814 person-years; quadrivalent 3 per 2831 person-years; rate ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38; 5645 person-years). The quadrivalent vaccine resulted in more injection-site adverse events, such as pain or redness, than control (537 versus 601 per 1000; risk ratio (RR) 1.12, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.18, 3895 participants, high-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence from two RCTs about serious adverse events with quadrivalent vaccine (control 12/2588; quadrivalent 8/2574), and about deaths (control 11/2591; quadrivalent 3/2582), owing to imprecision and indirectness. Nonavalent versus quadrivalent vaccine in 9- to 26-year-old females and males Three RCTs were included; one in females aged 9- to 15-years (n = 600), one in females aged 16- to 26-years (n = 14,215), and one in males aged 16- to 26-years (n = 500). The RCT in 16- to 26-year-old females reported clinical outcomes. There was little to no difference in the incidence of the combined outcome of high-grade cervical epithelial neoplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cervical cancer between the HPV vaccines (quadrivalent 325/6882, nonavalent 326/6871; OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16; 13,753 participants; high-certainty evidence). The other two RCTs did not collect data about clinical outcomes. There were slightly more local adverse events with the nonavalent vaccine (905 per 1000) than the quadrivalent vaccine (846 per 1000) (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.08; 3 RCTs, 15,863 participants; high-certainty evidence). Comparative evidence about serious adverse events in the three RCTs (nonavalent 243/8234, quadrivalent 192/7629; OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.61) was of low certainty, owing to imprecision and indirectness. HPV vaccination for people living with HIV Seven RCTs reported on HPV vaccines in people with HIV, with two small trials that collected data about clinical outcomes. Antibody responses were higher following vaccination with either bivalent or quadrivalent HPV vaccine than with control, and these responses could be demonstrated to have been maintained for up to 24 months in children living with HIV (low-certainty evidence). The evidence about clinical outcomes and harms for HPV vaccines in people with HIV is very uncertain (low- to very low-certainty evidence), owing to imprecision and indirectness.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The immunogenicity of two-dose and three-dose HPV vaccine schedules, measured using antibody responses in young females, is comparable. The quadrivalent vaccine probably reduces external genital lesions and anogenital warts in males compared with control. The nonavalent and quadrivalent vaccines offer similar protection against a combined outcome of cervical, vaginal, and vulval precancer lesions or cancer. In people living with HIV, both the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines result in high antibody responses. For all comparisons of alternative HPV vaccine schedules, the certainty of the body of evidence about serious adverse events reported during the study periods was low or very low, either because the number of events was low, or the evidence was indirect, or both. Post-marketing surveillance is needed to continue monitoring harms that might be associated with HPV vaccines in the population, and this evidence will be incorporated in future updates of this review. Long-term observational studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of reduced-dose schedules against HPV-related cancer endpoints, and whether adopting these schedules improves vaccine coverage rates.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic; Female; Humans; Male; Papillomavirus Infections; Papillomavirus Vaccines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Young Adult
PubMed: 31755549
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013479 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology Nov 2023To evaluate whether testing positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) before treatment is associated with cervical cancer recurrence and disease-free, cancer-specific, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate whether testing positive for human papillomavirus (HPV) before treatment is associated with cervical cancer recurrence and disease-free, cancer-specific, and overall survival and to report the relationship of HPV to cervical cancer histology, stage, grade, tumor size, lymph node involvement, and treatment response.
DATA SOURCES
EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched from inception to January 27, 2022, with the use of MeSH terms and keywords relating to cervical cancer, HPV, and prognosis. ClinicalTrials.gov was not searched because of the nature of our review question.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
Studies must have assessed HPV DNA or RNA in cervical pretreatment biopsies or cells from 20 or more patients with invasive cervical cancer followed up for any length of time and reported the effect of testing positive or negative for HPV on cervical cancer recurrence, disease-free survival, cancer-specific survival, or overall survival. We extracted data on HPV-detection methods, patient and tumor characteristics, and clinical outcomes.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were pooled with a random-effects model. Meta-regression was performed to explore heterogeneity. Of 11,179 titles or abstracts and 474 full-text articles reviewed, 77 studies were included in the systematic review. Among these 77 studies, 30 reported on the relationship of HPV status to histology, 39 to cancer stage, 13 to tumor grade, 17 to tumor size, 23 to lymph node involvement, and four to treatment response. Testing positive for HPV was associated with better disease-free survival (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25-0.57; 15 studies with 2,564 cases), cancer-specific survival (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.71; nine studies with 1,398 cases), and overall survival (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47-0.74; 36 studies with 9,169 cases), but not recurrence (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33-1.07; eight studies with 1,313 cases). Meta-regression revealed that the number of cases, tumor grade, specimen type, gene target, and HPV prevalence together explained 73.8% of the between-study heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION
This review indicates that HPV detectability in cervical cancer is associated with a better clinical prognosis.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://osf.io/dtyeb .
Topics: Female; Humans; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Papillomavirus Infections; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prognosis; Papillomaviridae
PubMed: 37856917
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005370 -
Expert Review of Vaccines 2023Despite their use, differences in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine efficacies remain uncertain. This study assesses efficacy differences among bivalent, quadrivalent,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Despite their use, differences in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine efficacies remain uncertain. This study assesses efficacy differences among bivalent, quadrivalent, and nine-valent HPV (2vHPV, 4vHPV, and 9vHPV) vaccines.
METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing HPV vaccine efficacy against persistent infection (≥6 months) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). Network meta-analysis yielded direct and indirect comparisons. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were reported, and robustness was evaluated via sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS
In 11 randomized controlled trials with 58,881 healthy women, for persistent infection with HPV 16, 9vHPV was most effective at 97% (RR = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.01-0.08); for HPV 18, 2vHPV (Cecolin) was most effective at 98% (RR = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.00-0.29); for CIN2+ associated with HPV 16 and 18, 4vHPV was most effective at 99% (RR = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.10) and 97% (RR = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.00-0.45), respectively; for persistent infection with HPV 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58, 9vHPV was ≥ 95% effective; both 2vHPV vaccines were cross-effective against HPV 31, 33, and 45; and 4vHPV was cross-effective against HPV 31.
CONCLUSIONS
HPV vaccine efficacies differ for different HPV types. Additional data are needed to determine the cross-efficacy of 2vHPV (Cecolin).
Topics: Humans; Female; Papillomavirus Vaccines; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Papillomavirus Infections; Network Meta-Analysis; Persistent Infection; Uterine Cervical Dysplasia; Papillomaviridae; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 37990881
DOI: 10.1080/14760584.2023.2287135 -
International Journal of Cancer Mar 2024We intended to update human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence and p16 positivity in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomars (SCC), and calculate HPV attributable fraction... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
We intended to update human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence and p16 positivity in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomars (SCC), and calculate HPV attributable fraction (AF) for oropharyngeal SCC by geographic region. We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify published studies of HPV prevalence and p16 positivity alone or together in oropharyngeal SCC before December 28, 2021. Studies that reported type-specific HPV DNA prevalence using broad-spectrum PCR-based testing methods were included. We estimated pooled HPV prevalence, type-specific HPV prevalence, and p16 positivity. AF of HPV was calculated by geographic region. One hundred and thirty-four studies including 12 139 cases were included in our analysis. The pooled HPV prevalence estimate for oropharyngeal SCC was 48.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.2-53.0). HPV prevalence varied significantly by geographic region, and the highest HPV prevalence in oropharyngeal SCC was noted in North America (72.6%, 95% CI 63.8-80.6). Among HPV positive cases, HPV 16 was the most common type with a prevalence of 40.2% (95% CI 35.7-44.7). The pooled p16 positivity in HPV positive and HPV16 positive oropharyngeal SCC cases was 87.2% (95% CI 81.6-91.2) and 91.7% (84.3-97.2). The highest AFs of HPV and HPV16 were noted in North America at 69.6% (95% CI 53.0-91.5) and 63.0% (48.0-82.7). [Correction added on 31 October 2023, after first online publication: the percentage symbol (%) was missing and has been added to 63.0% (48.0-82.7) in the Abstract and Conclusion.] A significant proportion of oropharyngeal SCC was attributable to HPV. HPV16 accounts for the majority of HPV positive oropharyngeal SCC cases. These findings highlight the importance of HPV vaccination in the prevention of a substantial proportion of oropharyngeal SCC cases.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16; DNA, Viral; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Human papillomavirus 16; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms; Papillomaviridae; Papillomavirus Infections; Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck
PubMed: 37861207
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34763 -
The Journal of International Medical... Jul 2023We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection and its associated risk factors among... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence of high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection and its associated risk factors among Nigerian women.
METHODS
Databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL were searched for studies published between 01 January 2001 and 31 December 2022, that had reported hrHPV infection and associated risk factors among women in Nigeria from ages of 25 to 65 years.
RESULTS
Of the 136 records initially retrieved, 18 were eligible for analysis. The prevalence of hrHPV genotypes was 25%, and for hrHPV 16 and 18, were 9% and 10%, respectively. The prevalence of hrHPV among HIV+ve women was 71%. The most common risk factors for hrHPV were age at coitarche and multiple sex partners.
CONCLUSION
hrHPV prevalence is high in women in Nigeria and common among those HIV+ve. Rapid screening for hrHPV genotypes is recommended, and multivalent HPV vaccines should be considered for women.
Topics: Humans; Female; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Papillomavirus Infections; Papillomaviridae; Risk Factors; Genotype; Prevalence; HIV Infections; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 37409466
DOI: 10.1177/03000605231182884 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2023The involvement of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the prostate carcinogenesis is a controversial issue. The presented meta-analysis was carried out to systematize the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The involvement of human papillomavirus (HPV) in the prostate carcinogenesis is a controversial issue. The presented meta-analysis was carried out to systematize the currently available research results regarding this question. The meta-analysis includes case-control studies from 1991 to 2022, which were collected from publicly available bibliometric databases. The meta-analysis was performed using Meta-Essentials_1.5 software. We used Begg's and Egger's methods to assess publication bias. Cochran's Q test was used to assess heterogeneity and the I index was employed for calculating the variation in the pooled estimations. The analysis was based on data from 27 case-control studies, which in total yielded 1607 tumour tissue samples of prostate and 1515 control samples (317 samples of normal tissue, 1198 samples of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)). According to the data obtained, there was high risk of prostate cancer by HPV infection in both cases. HPV was found in prostate cancer in 25.8% of cases, while in normal tissue samples the virus was detected in 9.2% of cases and in 17.4% with BPH as a control. In particular, more studies on the association of HPV and prostate cancer are needed to prove the role of HPV in the development of prostate cancer. In addition to the controversial question of whether HPV infection is associated with prostate cancer risk, it is worth considering whether the samples used as a control have an impact on the results. The impact of HPV in prostate tumour tissue samples on outcome should also be investigated.
Topics: Male; Humans; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Papillomavirus Infections; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Papillomaviridae; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 37789036
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-43767-7 -
Vaccines Sep 2022Specific adult populations known to be at high risk for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related disease, such as men who have sex with men, are inconsistently included in... (Review)
Review
Specific adult populations known to be at high risk for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related disease, such as men who have sex with men, are inconsistently included in national immunization programs. No compilation of the evidence on the real-world impact and effectiveness of HPV vaccines across these populations exists. This systematic literature review identifies and synthesizes the evidence of the real-world impact and effectiveness of the quadrivalent and nonavalent HPV vaccines in high-risk populations: women with prior/current HPV-related anogenital disease, men who have sex with men, immunocompromised/immunosuppressed individuals, female sex workers, transgender and non-binary individuals, and patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). The outcomes included anogenital precancers/cancers, head and neck cancers, genital warts, and RRP recurrence. From the 2216 records identified, 30 studies (25 effectiveness and 5 impact studies) were included in this systematic literature review. The results, quantity, and quality of these studies were highly variable. The evidence for effectiveness was of high quality only in women with prior/current cervical disease and in individuals with RRP, the most frequently studied populations. No studies of transgender/non-binary individuals or female sex workers were identified. The real-world evidence supports HPV vaccination among women with prior cervical disease and individuals with RRP. Significant real-world data gaps remain in these high-risk populations.
PubMed: 36146620
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10091543 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Dec 2023To conduct a systematic review to determine the global prevalence of HPV in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review to determine the global prevalence of HPV in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Literature was searched through October 2022 in main databases to address the question "What is the global prevalence of Human Papillomavirus in oral and oropharyngeal cancer?" Studies had to identify HPV by PCR, ISH, or p16 immunohistochemistry to be eligible. Quality was assessed using the JBI checklist for prevalence studies. Meta-analyses were performed, and reporting followed PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
Sixty-five studies were included, and most of them had methodological limitations related to sampling and the HPV detection tool. The pooled prevalence of HPV-positivity was 10% (event rate = 0.1; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.13; P < 0.01; I = 88%) in the oral cavity and 42% (event rate = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.49; P = 0.02; I2 = 97%) in oropharynx. The highest HPV prevalence in OSCC was reached by Japan, meanwhile, in OPSCC, Finland and Sweden were the most prevalent. HPV16 is the genotype most frequent with 69% in OSCC and 89% in OPSCC, being the tonsils the intraoral location more affected by HPV (63%, p < 0.01, I 76%).
CONCLUSION
The evidence points to an apparent burden in HPV-related OPSCC, mostly in North America, Northern Europe, and Oceania, especially due to the HPV16 infection suggesting different trends across continents.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
This updated systematic review and meta-analysis provide sufficient evidence about the global HPV prevalence in OSCC and OPSCC and the most frequent HPV subtype worldwide.
Topics: Humans; Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Papillomavirus Infections; Prevalence; Mouth Neoplasms; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms; Head and Neck Neoplasms
PubMed: 38158517
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05425-0