Comparison of different human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine types and dose schedules for prevention of HPV-related disease in females and males

Bergman, Hanna; Buckley, Brian S; Villanueva, Gemma; Petkovic, Jennifer; Garritty, Chantelle; Lutje, Vittoria; Riveros-Balta, Alina Ximena; Low, Nicola; Henschke, Nicholas

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013479

Cited by 105 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 120 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For older women who were negative for HPV types 16 and 18 there was moderate-certainty evidence that HPV vaccines reduce the risk of CIN 2+ from 45 to 14 (95% CI, 5 to 37) cases per 10,000 (2 trials, 7,552 participants) [28]. In a separate systematic review (20 trials; 31,940 participants), Bergman et al (2019) [29] found moderate-to-high certainty evidence that 2-and 3dose schedules of HPV vaccines in young females induce comparable immunogenicity, based on HPV antibody response. There was highcertainty evidence that quadrivalent and nine-valent vaccines result in similar protection against cervical, vaginal, and vulval precancers and cancers [29].…”

Section: Prophylactic Hpv Vaccinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a separate systematic review (20 trials; 31,940 participants), Bergman et al (2019) [29] found moderate-to-high certainty evidence that 2-and 3dose schedules of HPV vaccines in young females induce comparable immunogenicity, based on HPV antibody response. There was highcertainty evidence that quadrivalent and nine-valent vaccines result in similar protection against cervical, vaginal, and vulval precancers and cancers [29].…”

Section: Prophylactic Hpv Vaccinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Screening for Cervical Cancer: Protocol for Systematic Reviews to Inform Canadian Recommendations

Gates

Pillay

Reynolds

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Purpose. To inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care on cervical cancer screening by systematically reviewing evidence of: (a) the effectiveness; (b) test accuracy; (c) individuals’ values and preferences, and (d) strategies aimed at improving screening rates.Methods. De novo reviews will be conducted to evaluate effectiveness and to assess values and preferences. For test accuracy and strategies to improve screening rates, we will integrate studies from existing systematic reviews with search updates to the present. Two Cochrane reviews will provide evidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes from the conservative management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. We will search Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central (except for individuals’ values and preferences, where Medline, Scopus, and EconLit will be searched) via peer-reviewed search strategies, and the reference lists of included studies and reviews. We will search ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. Two reviewers will screen potentially eligible studies and agree on those to include. Data will be extracted by one reviewer with verification by another. Two reviewers will independently assess risk of bias and reach consensus. Where possible and suitable, we will pool studies via meta-analysis. We will compare accuracy data per outcome and per comparison using the Rutter and Gatsonis hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model and report relative sensitivities and specificities. Findings on values and preferences will be synthesized using a narrative synthesis approach and thematic analysis, depending on study designs. Two reviewers will appraise the certainty of evidence for all outcomes using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and come to consensus.Discussion. The publication of guidance on cervical cancer screening by the Task Force in 2013 focused on cytology. Since 2013, new studies using human papillomavirus tests for detection of cervical cancer have been published that will improve our understanding of screening in primary care settings. This review will inform updated recommendations based on currently available studies and address key evidence gaps noted in our previous review.Systematic review registration: not registered.

show abstract

Section: Prophylactic Hpv Vaccinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prophylactic Hpv Vaccinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening for Cervical Cancer: Protocol for Systematic Reviews to Inform Canadian Recommendations

Gates

Pillay

Reynolds

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Better antibody response in terms of higher GMT is seen when there is a longer interval between twodoses (12 months) than shorter interval (6 months) up to 3 years follow-up. 37 Therefore, inadvertent delays due to non-availability of vaccine, patient factors, etc. should not be a cause of concern.…”

Section: Interrupted Dosage Schedulementioning

confidence: 99%

Human papillomavirus vaccination: Good clinical practice recommendations from the Federation of Obstetric and Gynecological Societies of India

Bhatla

Meena

Gupta

et al. 2020

J of Obstet and Gynaecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination offers an excellent prospect for the primary prevention of cervical cancer. The bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines are both available in India. The nonavalent vaccine is licensed but not yet available. However, there still remain controversies regarding the vaccination of older women, immunocompromised females and other special groups. To provide recommendations for HPV vaccination in India. The Federation of Obstetric and Gynecological Societies of India (FOGSI) convened an expert group on cervical cancer prevention to formulate good clinical practice recommendations (GCPR) with respect to vaccine efficacy and safety, target groups, optimal timing and dosing schedules. HPV vaccines are licensed for females aged 9–45 years in India and have been seen to be safe and effective. FOGSI recommends HPV vaccination of all girls <15 years of age as the best target group, in whom two‐doses at an interval of 6 months, extendable to 18 months, are recommended. Three‐doses are recommended in girls >15 years of age, immunocompromised persons and sexual assault survivors. Older women and women with abnormal screening results may be vaccinated with an understanding that vaccination does not protect against already acquired infections and screening has to continue. Single‐dose vaccination results are promising. Increased awareness is required to reduce vaccine hesitancy. HPV vaccination should be the priority to achieve the elimination of cervical cancer. The introduction of affordable HPV vaccines and reduced dose schedules will improve coverage.

show abstract

“…The recent development of a highly effective vaccine against the human papillomavirus (HPV) has been met with widespread clinical and public health interest and awareness based on scientific and lay literature reports of its effectiveness and resulting reductions in associated cancer risk [1][2][3][4]. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCT) revealed strong antibody responses from two-and three-dose vaccinations that have resulted in a significant reduction in the incidence of external genital lesions and will likely result in long-term reduction in the incidence of high-risk cervical cancers and other HPV-mediated pathologies [5][6][7]. Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have revealed compelling evidence of substantial reductions in HPV-specific infections in geographic areas with high vaccination coverage, which will likely facilitate both direct clinical protection and more far-reaching effects involving herd immunity within those communities [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Knowledge, Awareness and Acceptance among Dental Students and Post-Graduate Dental Residents

Mann

Kingsley

2020

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The recent development of a vaccine that is highly effective against the human papillomavirus (HPV) has been met with widespread clinical and public health professional acceptance. However, social and societal barriers to vaccination may hamper public health efforts to prevent HPV-mediated diseases. Although a few studies have evaluated knowledge or awareness of HPV vaccination among dentists or dental educators, few studies have evaluated the acceptance, knowledge and awareness of HPV vaccination among dental students and post-graduate dental residents. The primary goal of this study is to evaluate survey responses regarding acceptance, knowledge and awareness of HPV vaccination among dental students and post-graduate dental residents. Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of a previously administered and collected questionnaire. The original protocol was reviewed by the UNLV Biomedical Institutional Research Board (IRB) and was deemed excluded from IRB review (OPRS#0811-2911). Results: Two hundred and ninety-three (N = 293) dental student and forty-one (N = 41) post-graduate dental resident questionnaires were available for a total sample size of N = 334. In brief, although the majority of dental students and residents agreed that vaccines are safe and effective, less than half of dental students (37.5%) or dental residents (48.7%) had discussed the HPV vaccine with a physician or had received the vaccine themselves. In addition, a significant percentage of dental students and residents felt they did not have enough information regarding the HPV vaccine (25.6% and 26.8%, respectively) or had significant concerns about the side effects (17.1%). Conclusions: The data suggest more specific information in dental school microbiology and immunology courses might be needed to increase awareness and knowledge of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, including the HPV vaccine. This enhanced education might also serve as a curricular focal point to answer questions regarding vaccine-related side effects and provide a mechanism for answering important questions regarding this vaccine.

show abstract

Comparison of different human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine types and dose schedules for prevention of HPV-related disease in females and males

Abstract: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Comparison of di erent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine types and dose schedules for prevention of HPV-related disease in females and males (Review)

Cited by 105 publications

References 120 publications

Screening for Cervical Cancer: Protocol for Systematic Reviews to Inform Canadian Recommendations

Screening for Cervical Cancer: Protocol for Systematic Reviews to Inform Canadian Recommendations

Human papillomavirus vaccination: Good clinical practice recommendations from the Federation of Obstetric and Gynecological Societies of India

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Knowledge, Awareness and Acceptance among Dental Students and Post-Graduate Dental Residents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About