Dataset Information

Projected future impact of HPV vaccination and primary HPV screening on cervical cancer rates from 2017-2035: Example from Australia.

ABSTRACT: Many countries are transitioning from cytology-based to longer-interval HPV screening. Trials comparing HPV-based screening to cytology report an increase in CIN2/3 detection at the first screen, and longer-term reductions in CIN3+; however, population level year-to-year transitional impacts are poorly understood. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of switching to longer-interval primary HPV screening in the context of HPV vaccination. We used Australia as an example setting, since Australia will make this transition in December 2017.Using a model of HPV vaccination, transmission, natural history and cervical screening, Policy1-Cervix, we simulated the planned transition from recommending cytology every two years for sexually-active women aged 18-20 to 69, to recommending HPV screening every five years for women aged 25-74 years. We estimated rates of CIN2/3, cervical cancer incidence, and mortality for each year from 2005 to 2035, considering ranges for HPV test accuracy and screening compliance in the context of HPV vaccination (current coverage ~82% in females; ~76% in males).Transient increases are predicted to occur in rates of CIN2/3 detection and invasive cervical cancer in the first two to three years following the screening transition (of 16-24% and 11-14% in respectively, compared to 2017 rates). However, by 2035, CIN2/3 and invasive cervical cancer rates are predicted to fall by 40-44% and 42-51%, respectively, compared to 2017 rates. Cervical cancer mortality rates are predicted to remain unchanged until ~2020, then decline by 34-45% by 2035. Over the period 2018-2035, switching to primary HPV screening in Australia is expected to avert 2,006 cases of invasive cervical cancer and save 587 lives.Transient increases in detected CIN2/3 and invasive cancer, which may be detectable at the population level, are predicted following a change to primary HPV screening. This is due to improved test sensitivity bringing forward diagnoses, resulting in longer term reductions in both cervical cancer incidence and mortality. Fluctuations in health outcomes due to the transition to a longer screening interval are predicted to occur for 10-15 years, but cervical cancer rates will be significantly reduced thereafter due to the impact of HPV vaccination and HPV screening. In order to maintain confidence in primary HPV screening through the transitional phase, it is important to widely communicate that an initial increase in CIN2/3 and perhaps even invasive cervical cancer is expected after a national transition to primary HPV screening, that this phenomenon is due to increased prevalent disease detection, and that this effect represents a marker of screening success.

SUBMITTER: Hall MT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5812553 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Projected future impact of HPV vaccination and primary HPV screening on cervical cancer rates from 2017-2035: Example from Australia.

Hall Michaela T MT Simms Kate T KT Lew Jie-Bin JB Smith Megan A MA Saville Marion M Canfell Karen K

PloS one 20180214 2

<h4>Background</h4>Many countries are transitioning from cytology-based to longer-interval HPV screening. Trials comparing HPV-based screening to cytology report an increase in CIN2/3 detection at the first screen, and longer-term reductions in CIN3+; however, population level year-to-year transitional impacts are poorly understood. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of switching to longer-interval primary HPV screening in the context of HPV vaccination. We used Australia as an example sett ...[more]

PMID: 29444073

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSEER-reported cervical cancer incidence rates reflect the total female population including women no longer at risk due to hysterectomy. Hysterectomy rates have been declining in the United States as alternative treatments have become available, which could result in an apparent increase in SEER-reported cervical cancer rates. We aimed to obtain nationally representative historical data on hysterectomy rates in USA, use trends analysis to project rates back to 1935 and forward to 2035, and then predict the impact of changing hysterectomy rates on SEER-reported cervical cancer rates.MethodsWe performed a systematic search of Medline, Embase, Premedline, Cochrane Central databases and extracted nationally-representative hysterectomy incidence data from 1965 to 2009, including data on the number of cervix-preserving (subtotal) procedures. We then projected rates back to 1935, and forward to 2035 based on trends from joinpoint regression. These rates were then used to estimate hysterectomy prevalence out to 2035, and then to predict the impact of changing hysterectomy rates on SEER-reported cervical cancer rates to 2035. We examined alternative assumptions regarding projected hysterectomy incidence rates out to 2035, including a scenario in which rates decline no further from 2009 rates, and a scenario where rates decline at twice the baseline rate.ResultsEstimated age-standardized hysterectomy incidence increased from 2.4 to 10.6 per 1000 women between 1935 and 1975. Thereafter, rates are predicted to fall to 3.9 per 1000 by 2035. Subtotal hysterectomy procedures declined from being the predominant method in 1935 to less than 12% of procedures from 1970 onwards. Consequently, holding all else constant, an increase in SEER-reported age-standardized cervical cancer incidence rates (ages 0-85+) of 9% is expected from 2009 to 2035. The predictions were minimally impacted by alternative scenarios for future hysterectomy rates.ConclusionsDeclining hysterectomy rates have implications for the interpretation of SEER-reported cervical cancer rates. A background increase in cervical cancer rates due to decreasing population hysterectomy exposure may partially offset expected decreases from recent cervical screening changes recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Evaluations of new cervical cancer prevention opportunities should consider the background impact of historical and projected hysterectomy rates.

Project description:BackgroundHuman Papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted disease in the United States (US), with 12 cancer causing strains. Vaccination rates in the southern US fall below the national average. Pharmacists provide an opportunity to improve vaccination rates.ObjectivesThe objectives of this study were to 1) identify barriers and facilitators to providing the HPV vaccine and Vaccines for Children (VFC) program participation in pharmacies and clinics, and 2) assess pharmacy staff, clinic staff, and parent perceptions of 3 collaboration models to improve HPV vaccination.MethodsA developmental formative evaluation was conducted with pharmacy staff, primary care clinic staff, and parents of adolescent children. Interview guides were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Barriers and facilitators to HPV vaccination and VFC participation were explored. Additionally, acceptability of 3 collaboration models were explored: 1) a shared-responsibility model in which a physician provides the first dose of HPV vaccine with the second provided in the pharmacy, 2) a pharmacy-based model in which a clinic refers patients to the pharmacy to receive both doses, and 3) an insourced model in which pharmacists schedule days to provide the vaccine in the collaborating clinic.ResultsTwenty-nine interviews were conducted between August 2019 and June 2020. Both pharmacy and clinic staff had positive views toward the HPV vaccine and vaccinations in general. Pharmacists and physicians reported parental awareness and education as a barrier to HPV vaccination. Counseling about HPV vaccine was reported as being more time-consuming because of the stigma associated with the vaccine. Parents were willing to have their children vaccinated for HPV in the pharmacy but desired their child's physician be involved in the immunization process. The shared-responsibility model was the most favored of the 3 collaboration models.ConclusionPerceptions of the HPV vaccine and vaccination in pharmacies were positive. Collaboration between clinics and pharmacies to improve HPV vaccination rates is viewed positively by pharmacy staff, clinic staff, and parents. This study will guide implementation of pharmacist-physician collaborative models to improve vaccination through pharmacy participation in the VFC program and HPV vaccination.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus vaccines prevent human papillomavirus infection and cervical precancers. The impact of vaccinating women with a current infection or after treatment for an human papillomavirus-associated lesion is not fully understood. OBJECTIVES:To determine whether human papillomavirus-16/18 vaccination influences the outcome of infections present at vaccination and the rate of infection and disease after treatment of lesions. STUDY DESIGN:We included 1711 women (18-25 years) with carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection and 311 women of similar age who underwent treatment for cervical precancer and who participated in a community-based trial of the AS04-adjuvanted human papillomavirus-16/18 virus-like particle vaccine. Participants were randomized (human papillomavirus or hepatitis A vaccine) and offered 3 vaccinations over 6 months. Follow-up included annual visits (more frequently if clinically indicated), referral to colposcopy of high-grade and persistent low-grade lesions, treatment by loop electrosurgical excisional procedure when clinically indicated, and cytologic and virologic follow-up after treatment. Among women with human papillomavirus infection at the time of vaccination, we considered type-specific viral clearance, and development of cytologic (squamous intraepithelial lesions) and histologic (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia) lesions. Among treated women, we considered single-time and persistent human papillomavirus infection, squamous intraepithelial lesions, and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater. Outcomes associated with infections absent before treatment also were evaluated. Infection-level analyses were performed and vaccine efficacy estimated. RESULTS:Median follow-up was 56.7 months (women with human papillomavirus infection) and 27.3 months (treated women). There was no evidence of vaccine efficacy to increase clearance of human papillomavirus infections or decrease incidence of cytologic/histologic abnormalities associated with human papillomavirus types present at enrollment. Vaccine efficacy for human papillomavirus 16/18 clearance and against human papillomavirus 16/18 progression from infection to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater were -5.4% (95% confidence interval -19,10) and 0.3% (95% confidence interval -69,41), respectively. Among treated women, 34.1% had oncogenic infection and 1.6% had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater detected after treatment, respectively, and of these 69.8% and 20.0% were the result of new infections. We observed no significant effect of vaccination on rates of infection/lesions after treatment. Vaccine efficacy estimates for human papillomavirus 16/18 associated persistent infection and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater after treatment were 34.7% (95% confidence interval -131, 82) and -211% (95% confidence interval -2901, 68), respectively. We observed evidence for a partial and nonsignificant protective effect of vaccination against new infections absent before treatment. For incident human papillomavirus 16/18, human papillomavirus 31/33/45, and oncogenic human papillomavirus infections post-treatment, vaccine efficacy estimates were 57.9% (95% confidence interval -43, 88), 72.9% (95% confidence interval 29, 90), and 36.7% (95% confidence interval 1.5, 59), respectively. CONCLUSION:We find no evidence for a vaccine effect on the fate of detectable human papillomavirus infections. We show that vaccination does not protect against infections/lesions after treatment. Evaluation of vaccine protection against new infections after treatment and resultant lesions warrants further consideration in future studies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Since March 2014, the quadrivalent HPV vaccine has been incorporated into the Brazilian Unified Health Care System and began to be offered, without direct costs, for girls from 9 to 13?years of age. Older female adolescents would have the option to be vaccinated at private health care system being responsible for the payment of HPV vaccine. The present study aimed to evaluate the coverage rates and predictors of HPV vaccination in Brazil among two groups of female adolescents: eligible and non-eligible for the HPV vaccination public program. METHODS:We used data from the 2015 Brazilian National Adolescent School-Based Health Survey, which involved a probabilistic sample of 5404 female adolescents students at public and private schools. Using a questionnaire, we gathered information on sociodemographic characteristics, sexual behavior, and respondent perception of parental supervision and have been vaccinated for HPV. Age-specific vaccination rates were analyzed in girls aged 9 to 13 at the time of public vaccination (eligible for public policy), as well among those 14 to 17?years old not eligible by the Ministry of Health for vaccination. We used Poisson regression models to investigate associated factors. RESULTS:HPV vaccine coverage was 83.5 and 21.8% among eligible and non-eligible populations, respectively. In both populations, the chance of being vaccinated decreased with older age. In the eligible population there is a greater chance of being vaccinated among ethnic group "pardas" but not with other indicators of socioeconomic status. In the non-eligible population, there was a clear association between higher vaccine coverage and greater maternal education and living with the mother. CONCLUSION:Our findings highlight the importance of public policies to minimize inequities in access to cancer prevention measures in vulnerable adolescents. A public policy of HPV vaccination for older female adolescents would increase coverage with possible reduction of HPV-related diseases in this group of women.

Dataset Information

Projected future impact of HPV vaccination and primary HPV screening on cervical cancer rates from 2017-2035: Example from Australia.

Publications

Projected future impact of HPV vaccination and primary HPV screening on cervical cancer rates from 2017-2035: Example from Australia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets