Monitoring Effect of Human Papillomavirus Vaccines in US Population, Emerging Infections Program, 2008–2012

Hariri, Susan; Markowitz, Lauri E.; Bennett, Nancy M.; Niccolai, Linda M.; Schafer, Sean; Bloch, Karen C.; Park, Ina U.; Scahill, Mary; Julian, Pamela J.; Abdullah, Nasreen; Levine, Diane; Whitney, Erin; Unger, Elizabeth R.; Steinau, Martin; Bauer, Heidi M.; Meek, James; Hadler, James L.; Sosa, Lynn; Powell, Suzanne E.; Johnson, Margaret; Group, HPV-IMPACT Working

doi:10.3201/eid2109.141841

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The HPV IMPACT study collected data on CIN II–III/AIS from smaller populations, and also collected screening and vaccination data. 15 The study observed declines in HPV 16/18-attributable lesions among presumed-vaccinated young women age 18–39 between 2008 and 2012, while no significant decrease occurred in lesions among presumed-unvaccinated women. 16 National data have documented declines in vaccine-type HPV infections, as well as in anogenital warts among younger women in the United States since the introduction of the vaccine in 2006.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Surveillance of high-grade cervical cancer precursors (CIN III/AIS) in four population-based cancer registries, United States, 2009–2012

Watson

Soman

Flagg

et al. 2017

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surveillance of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III (CIN III) and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) is important for determining the burden of a preventable disease, identifying effects of vaccination on future diagnoses, and developing targeted programs. We analyzed population-based rates of high-grade cervical cancer precursor lesions using data from four central cancer registries (diagnosis years 2009–2012 from Louisiana, Kentucky, Michigan, and diagnosis years 2011–2012 from Los Angeles) by age, race, and histology. We also compared rates of precursors to invasive cancers. With 4 complete years of data from Michigan, we were able to conduct a trend analysis for that state. Data analysis was conducted in Atlanta during 2016. Kentucky reported the highest rate of CIN III/AIS (69.8), followed by Michigan (55.4), Louisiana (42.3), and Los Angeles (19.2). CIN III/AIS rates declined among women in Michigan by 37% each year for women aged 15–19, 14% for those aged 20–24, and 7% for those aged 25–29. Rates of CIN III/AIS vary by registry, and were higher than invasive cancer. In Michigan, declines in CIN III/AIS among women aged 15–29 are likely related in part to updated screening recommendations, and to the impact of human papillomavirus vaccination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Surveillance of high-grade cervical cancer precursors (CIN III/AIS) in four population-based cancer registries, United States, 2009–2012

Watson

Soman

Flagg

et al. 2017

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Human papillomavirus genotyping is the basis for monitoring the efficacy of currently licensed prophylactic HPV vaccines, and a practical and reliable genotyping procedure is critical for establishing effective vaccine programs. The expected genotype coverages of HPV vaccines have been reported in Europe and North America . A variety of factors influence the estimation of vaccine type coverage, including the cervical disease category, clinical specimen source, genotyping method, HPV positivity, ethnicity, and correction formulae.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The expected genotype coverages of HPV vaccines have been reported in Europe and North America. (6,23,24) A variety of factors influence the estimation of vaccine type coverage, including the cervical disease category, clinical specimen source, genotyping method, HPV positivity, ethnicity, and correction formulae. Care should be taken when using DNA specimens extracted from exfoliated cervical cells to estimate HPV genotype attributions because multiple infections may be present.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of methods using paraffin‐embedded tissues and exfoliated cervical cells to evaluate human papillomavirus genotype attribution

Torii

Fujii²,

Kukimoto

et al. 2016

Cancer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monitoring the attribution of human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes to cervical precancerous lesions is essential in assessing the efficacy of HPV vaccines. To resolve the lack of studies comparing the HPV genotyping procedures used to estimate HPV genotype attribution, we undertook a retrospective cross‐sectional study to determine the appropriate genotyping procedures for evaluating the potential efficacy of HPV vaccines. Three procedures, including two different genotyping methods, Clinichip HPV test (C‐Chip) and modified GP5+/6+ PCR coupled to fluorescent bead sorter detection (MGP), using exfoliated cervical cells (C‐Chip and C‐MGP, respectively) or formalin‐fixed paraffin‐embedded tissues (F‐MGP), were compared. The overall agreement in detecting high‐risk HPV was 88.5–92.1% among the three procedures, and genotype‐specific agreement was 83.9–100% for all pairwise comparisons. In cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3 specimens, HPV16/18 attribution estimated with the hierarchical attribution method was consistent among the procedures: 52.3% (45/86) for C‐Chip, 54.7% (47/86) for C‐MGP, and 52.3% (45/86) for F‐MGP (P = 0.81). HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 hierarchical attribution was 88.4% (76/86) with C‐Chip, 86.0% (74/86) with C‐MGP, and 83.7% (72/86) with F‐MGP (P = 0.49). In cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 specimens, the corresponding hierarchical attribution was 96.4% (53/55) with C‐Chip, 89.1% (49/55) with C‐MGP, and 94.5% (52/55) with F‐MGP (P = 0.27). Although F‐MGP is theoretically a reliable method for determining HPV genotype attribution, it is acceptable to use C‐Chip or C‐MGP, coupled to the hierarchical attribution formula to correct the bias of multiple infections. These approaches using exfoliated cervical cells are practical for monitoring the efficacy of HPV vaccines.

show abstract

“…12 Table 2). [58][59][60] In modified its recommendation from a three-dose schedule to a twodose schedule to be administered 6-to 12-months apart. 64 In spite of these recommendations, vaccination rates in the US have been significantly lower than those reported for other industrialized nations as well as developing countries.…”

Section: Vaccination As Prevention Strategy For Cervical Cancer Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The HPV‐IMPACT pilot project was established in 2008 as a collaboration effort between the CDC and five sites in the Emerging Infections Program Network. Its objectives included monitoring the impact of HPV vaccination on CIN2+ through population‐based laboratory surveillance while collecting relevant clinical information and detailed HPV vaccination history, and estimating the annual rates of cervical cancer screening among the population in the catchment areas . HPV vaccination status in women with CIN2+ was available in 48% of patients who were age‐eligible during the analysis period.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cervical cancer screening in the era of HPV vaccination: A review of shifting paradigms in cytopathology

Barroeta

Adhikari-Guragain

Grotkowski

2017

Diagnostic Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant changes in cervical cancer screening practice, guidelines, and prevention of cervical cancer have taken place in recent years including the raising of initial cervical cancer screening age, changes in frequency of cytology screening, and the adoption of high risk HPV and cytology co-testing for some patients; the introduction of the bivalent, quadrivalent, and 9-valent HPV vaccines; and the recent approval of high risk HPV testing as primary screening with the use of cytology as triage in positive cases. This review discusses the significance of primary HPV screening, the impact of HPV vaccination in the prevalence of cervical cancer and its precursors, the interplay between high risk HPV testing and vaccination, and the implications for clinical and cytological management. Future strategies for cervical screening in the post-vaccination era are also discussed.

show abstract

Monitoring Effect of Human Papillomavirus Vaccines in US Population, Emerging Infections Program, 2008–2012

Abstract: Methods for surveillance of cervical precancers and associated types were developed to monitor effect of HPV vaccination.

Cited by 18 publications

References 15 publications

Surveillance of high-grade cervical cancer precursors (CIN III/AIS) in four population-based cancer registries, United States, 2009–2012

Surveillance of high-grade cervical cancer precursors (CIN III/AIS) in four population-based cancer registries, United States, 2009–2012

Comparison of methods using paraffin‐embedded tissues and exfoliated cervical cells to evaluate human papillomavirus genotype attribution

Cervical cancer screening in the era of HPV vaccination: A review of shifting paradigms in cytopathology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About