Search

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy of the human papillomavirus HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against non-vaccine oncogenic HPV types in the end-of-study analysis after 4 years of follow-up in PATRICIA (PApilloma TRIal against Cancer In young Adults). METHODS: Healthy women aged 15-25 years with no more than six lifetime sexual partners were included in PATRICIA irrespective of their baseline HPV DNA status, HPV-16 or HPV-18 serostatus, or cytology. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to HPV-16/18 vaccine or a control hepatitis A vaccine, via an internet-based central randomisation system using a minimisation algorithm to account for age ranges and study sites. The study was double-blind. The primary endpoint of PATRICIA has been reported previously; the present analysis evaluates cross-protective vaccine efficacy against non-vaccine oncogenic HPV types in the end-of-study analysis. Analyses were done for three cohorts: the according-to-protocol cohort for efficacy (ATP-E; vaccine n=8067, control n=8047), total vaccinated HPV-naive cohort (TVC-naive; no evidence of infection with 14 oncogenic HPV types at baseline, approximating young adolescents before sexual debut; vaccine n=5824, control n=5820), and the total vaccinated cohort (TVC; all women who received at least one vaccine dose, approximating catch-up populations that include sexually active women; vaccine n=9319, control=9325). Vaccine efficacy was evaluated against 6-month persistent infection, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) associated with 12 non-vaccine HPV types (individually or as composite endpoints), and CIN3+ associated with the composite of 12 non-vaccine HPV types. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00122681. FINDINGS: Consistent vaccine efficacy against persistent infection and CIN2+ (with or without HPV-16/18 co-infection) was seen across cohorts for HPV-33, HPV-31, HPV-45, and HPV-51. In the most conservative analysis of vaccine efficacy against CIN2+, where all cases co-infected with HPV-16/18 were removed, vaccine efficacy was noted for HPV-33 in all cohorts, and for HPV-31 in the ATP-E and TVC-naive. Vaccine efficacy against CIN2+ associated with the composite of 12 non-vaccine HPV types (31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68), with or without HPV-16/18 co-infection, was 46·8% (95% CI 30·7-59·4) in the ATP-E, 56·2% (37·2-69·9) in the TVC-naive, and 34·2% (20·4-45·8) in the TVC. Corresponding values for CIN3+ were 73·8% (48·3-87·9), 91·4% (65·0-99·0), and 47·5% (22·8-64·8). INTERPRETATION: Data from the end-of-study analysis of PATRICIA show cross-protective efficacy of the HPV-16/18 vaccine against four oncogenic non-vaccine HPV types-HPV-33, HPV-31, HPV-45, and HPV-51-in different trial cohorts representing diverse groups of women. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the impact of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine on infection and cervical disease related to 10 nonvaccine HPV types (31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, and 59) associated with >20% of cervical cancers. The population evaluated included HPV-naive women and women with preexisting HPV infection and/or HPV-related disease at enrollment. METHODS: Phase 3 efficacy studies enrolled 17,622 women aged 16-26 years. Subjects underwent cervicovaginal sampling and Pap testing on day 1 and then at 6-12-month intervals for up to 4 years. HPV typing was performed on samples from enrollment and follow-up visits, including samples obtained for diagnosis or treatment of HPV-related disease. All subjects who received 1 dose and returned for follow-up were included. RESULTS: Vaccination reduced the rate of HPV-31/33/45/52/58 infection by 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1% to 28.7%) and of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1-3 or adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) by 18.8% (95% CI, 7.4% to 28.9%). Vaccination also reduced the rate of HPV-31/58/59-related CIN1-3/AIS by 26.0% (95% CI, 6.7% to 41.4%), 28.1% (95% CI, 5.3% to 45.6%), and 37.6% (95% CI, 6.0% to 59.1%), respectively. Although a modest reduction in HPV-31/33/45/52/58-related CIN2 or worse was observed, the estimated reduction was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These cross-protection results complement the vaccine's prophylactic efficacy against disease associated with HPV-6, -11, -16, and -18. Long-term monitoring of vaccinated populations are needed to fully ascertain the population-based impact and public health significance of these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00092521 , NCT00092534 , and NCT00092482. Copyright © 2009 Infectious Diseases Society of America [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 vaccine reduces the risk of HPV-6/11/16/18-related cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1-3 or adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS). Here, its impact on CIN1-3/AIS associated with nonvaccine oncogenic HPV types was evaluated. METHODS: We enrolled 17,622 women aged 16-26 years. All underwent cervicovaginal sampling and Pap testing at regular intervals for up to 4 years. HPV genotyping was performed for biopsy samples, and histological diagnoses were determined by a pathology panel. Analyses were conducted among subjects who were negative for 14 HPV types on day 1. Prespecified analyses included infection of 6 months' duration and CIN1-3/AIS due to the 2 and 5 most common HPV types in cervical cancer after HPV types 16 and 18, as well as all tested nonvaccine types. RESULTS: Vaccination reduced the incidence of HPV-31/45 infection by 40.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.9% to 59.0%) and of CIN1-3/AIS by 43.6% (95% CI, 12.9% to 64.1%), respectively. The reduction in HPV-31/33/45/52/58 infection and CIN1-3/AIS was 25.0% (95% CI, 5.0% to 40.9%) and 29.2% (95% CI, 8.3% to 45.5%), respectively. Efficacy for CIN2-3/AIS associated with the 10 nonvaccine HPV types was 32.5% (95% CI, 6.0% to 51.9%). Reductions were most notable for HPV-31. CONCLUSIONS: HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine reduced the risk of CIN2-3/AIS associated with nonvaccine types responsible for approximately 20% of cervical cancers. The clinical benefit of cross-protection is not expected to be fully additive to the efficacy already observed against HPV-6/11/16/18-related disease, because women may have >1 CIN lesion, each associated with a different HPV type. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00092521 , NCT00092534 , and NCT00092482. Copyright © 2009 Infectious Diseases Society of America [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The clinical relevance of the amount of human papillomavirus type 18 (HPV18) DNA in cervical tissue (ie, HPV18 DNA load) is unknown.Methods: Study subjects were 303 women who were HPV18 positive at enrollment into the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance (ASC-US) and Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (LSIL) Triage Study. HPV18 DNA load, expressed as copies of HPV18 per nanogram of cellular DNA, at enrollment was quantitatively measured. Subjects were followed up semiannually for a period of 2 years for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2-3 (CIN2-3). A linear regression model was used to examine associations of CIN2-3 with HPV18 DNA load. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: CIN2-3 was confirmed in 92 of 303 (30.4%) HPV18-positive women. Among women without CIN2-3, HPV18 DNA load was positively associated with increasing severity of cervical cytology at enrollment (Ptrend < .001). However, among those with CIN2-3, HPV18 DNA load was not associated with severity of cervical cytology at enrollment (Ptrend = .33). The ratios of geometric means of HPV18 DNA load at enrollment among women with CIN2-3, relative to those without, were 6.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.31 to 117.92) for those with normal cytology at enrollment, 0.50 (95% CI = 0.10 to 2.44) for those with ASC-US, 0.11 (95% CI = 0.03 to 0.46) for those with LSIL, and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.01 to 0.80) for those with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). After adjusting for age and coinfection with other high-risk HPVs, a statistically significant association of lower HPV18 DNA load with CIN2-3 was observed among women with LSIL or HSIL at enrollment (P = .02). Within the 2-year period, HPV18 DNA load was unrelated to the timing of CIN2-3 diagnosis. Overall results were similar when the outcome was CIN3.Conclusions: HPV18 DNA load was higher for women with LSIL or HSIL at enrollment with no evidence of CIN2-3 during the 2-year follow-up period than it was for women with CIN2-3. Thus, testing for high levels of HPV18 DNA does not appear to be clinically useful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Persistent infection with human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16) is a primary etiological factor for the development of cervical cancer. Genes involved in antigen processing influence both the repertoire of antigens presented by HPV16-infected cells and the nature of HPV16-specific immune responses. Genetic variation in these genes may affect protein structure and function and, consequently, the ability of an individual to clear HPV infection. Methods: Thirty-five single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 5 genes (LMP2, TAP1, LMP7, TAP2, and Tapasin) were investigated for association with susceptibility to HPV16-associated cervical cancer. Sequencing of these genes resulted in the discovery of 15 previously unreported SNPs. Microsphere-array flow cytometry-based genotyping was conducted on 787 samples from Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women (241 randomly selected control subjects, 205 HPV16-positive control subjects, and 341 HPV16-positive case subjects with cervical cancer). Results: For 9 SNPs, 8 of which had not previously been reported in the context of cervical cancer, there were statistically significant differences between the genotype distribution in case subjects and that in control subjects. Haplotype analysis of 3 haplotype blocks revealed 3 haplotypes with significant differences in frequency in case-control comparisons. Both HPV16-specific and non-type-specific differences in genotype distribution were seen. Conclusions: Genes involved in antigen processing for HLA class I presentation may contribute to susceptibility to cervical cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Identification of factors associated with risk of relapse after treatment for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) has important clinical implications. Study subjects were women participating in the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance and Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study who were treated for CIN3 by loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) and who had a baseline infection with human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16). These women were followed every 6 months for 2 years. Post-LEEP CIN2-3 was found in 20 (10.0%) of the 201 women. An adjusted relative risk of 3.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-8.9) was associated with HPV16 non-European, compared with European, variants, a finding that is consistent with the variant-related risk of prevalent/incident high-grade CIN. Copyright © 2007 Infectious Diseases Society of America [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American Cancer Society (ACS) has developed guidelines for the use of the prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for the prevention of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer. These recommendations are based on a formal review of the available evidence. They address the use of prophylactic HPV vaccines, including who should be vaccinated and at what age, as well as a summary of policy and implementation issues. Implications for screening are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Prospective data on the risks of cervical precancer associated with specific human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes are limited. METHODS: In 5060 women participating in the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance/Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions Triage Study (ALTS), we determined the cumulative 2-year risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 or more severe (> or =CIN2) and of grade 3 or more severe (> or =CIN3) for 38 individual HPV genotypes, as detected by polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The most common HPV genotypes detected at baseline, in descending order of prevalence, were 16, 52, 51, 31, 18, 53, 39, 56, 62, 59, and 58. When detected as a single-type HPV infection, HPV-16 had a 2-year cumulative risk of 50.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44.1%-57.2%) for > or =CIN2 and 39.1% (95% CI, 32.9%-45.7%) for > or =CIN3. For other singly detected carcinogenic HPV types, the risk of > or =CIN2 ranged from 4.7% (for HPV-59) to 29.5% (for HPV-31), and the risk of > or =CIN3 ranged from 0.0% (for HPV-59) to 14.8% (for HPV-31). Multiple infections with HPV genotypes of different risk classes resulted in a risk that was similar to, and not significantly different from, the risk observed for the HPV genotype of the highest risk class. CONCLUSIONS: Genotype-specific HPV testing may be useful for identifying women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions who are at higher and lower risk of prevalent and incipient cervical precancer. Copyright © 2006 Infectious Diseases Society of America [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) infections are at high risk of neoplastic progression if they persist. Persistence can be measured by repeated HPV DNA tests or by cytologic testing. Thus, it is useful to understand the relationship between these 2 measurements. To explore the relative timing of HPV DNA clearance versus cytologic regression, data were analyzed from 840 study participants who were followed-up by repeat thin-layer cytology and HPV testing by a hybrid capture test at 6-month intervals for 2 years. On average, HPV DNA detection persisted longer than related cytologic abnormalities (P<.001). HPV type-specific data from a subset of 448 women with complete polymerase chain reaction test data confirmed that HPV DNA persisted longer than cytologic abnormalities (P<.001). It appears that the natural history of HPV typically includes periods before and after cytologic abnormality, in which HPV DNA is the more sensitive indicator of infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess risk factors for high-grade cervical dysplasia among southwestern Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women.Design: Clinic-based case-control study.Setting: University-affiliated gynecology clinics.Subjects: Cases were Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women with biopsy-proven high-grade cervical dysplasia (n = 201). Controls were Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women from the same clinics with normal cervical epithelium (n = 337).Methods: Study design included interviews focused on histories of sexually transmitted diseases, sexual behavior, reproductive histories, hygienic practices, contraceptive use, cigarette smoking, and diet. Laboratory studies included bacterial and protozoal cultures of the cervix; hybridization tests to identify human papillomavirus (HPV) genome with commercial (ViraPap and ViraType) and polymerase chain reaction-based assays; and serum antibody tests for herpes simplex virus, Chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C.Results: For both ethnic groups combined, after adjustment for ethnicity, age, and sexual behavior, the strongest risks for cervical dysplasia were associated with cervical HPV infection as identified by ViraPap (odds ratio [OR], 12.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.2 to 20.0) or with polymerase chain reaction (OR, 20.8; 95% CI, 10.8 to 40.2). Other factors associated with dysplasia included cigarette smoking at the time of diagnosis (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.8); low income (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.0); low educational level (OR, 6.2; 95% CI, 3.4 to 11.1); history of any sexually transmitted disease (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.7); and seroprevalence of antibodies to hepatitis B (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.9 to 3.5). For Hispanic women, HPV 16/18 identified by ViraType was strongly associated with cervical dysplasia (OR, 171.0; 95% CI, 22.8 to 1280.5). Antibodies to herpes simplex virus type 2 were not associated with dysplasia in Hispanic women but were significantly associated with dysplasia among non-Hispanic whites. Risks associated with cigarette smoking also varied by ethnic group.Conclusions: The strongest risk factor associated with high-grade cervical dysplasia among clinic attendees was HPV infection. Although most of the risk factors we examined showed similar associations for dysplasia for both ethnic groups, our data suggest that several different risk factors may be relevant to the development of cervical dysplasia in Hispanics compared with non-Hispanic whites who attend the same clinics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Epidemiologic studies have demonstrated strong and consistent associations between the detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 DNA and the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cervical cancer. However, HPV16 is also the most common type of HPV in the normal population, and only a minority of women with HPV16 infection develop cervical cancer. Studies of genomic heterogeneity in HPV16 have demonstrated the presence of multiple variant forms in all human populations examined to date. It is conceivable that the natural variants of HPV16 in a given population may not have the same biologic behavior.Purpose: This study was designed to determine the association between natural variants of HPV16 and the risk of biopsy-confirmed CIN 2 or 3, the most important precancerous lesions of the uterine cervix.Methods: Prospective studies were conducted among 1) women attending a university and 2) women presenting to a sexually transmitted disease clinic. Subjects were eligible for inclusion in this investigation if the initial cytologic findings did not reveal CIN 2-3 and HPV16 DNA was detected by means of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method in one or more cervical or vulvovaginal samples. Eligible subjects were followed every 4 months with cervical Pap smears and colposcopic examinations. Women were referred for biopsy if cytology or colposcopy suggested CIN 2-3. Two groups of HPV16 variants, prototype-like and nonprototype-like, were determined by means of single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis of PCR products from the noncoding region of the viral genome. Representative SSCP patterns from HPV16 variants were further characterized by direct DNA sequencing of the PCR products. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by Cox regression analysis.Results: Prototype-like variants accounted for 79% of the HPV16 detected in university students and 86% of the virus detected in patients presenting to the sexually transmitted disease clinic. CIN 2-3 was confirmed by biopsy in nine of 57 HPV16-positive women attending the university and in 10 of 66 HPV16-positive women presenting to the sexually transmitted disease clinic. Among university students, those with HPV16 nonprototype-like variants were 6.5 (95% CI = 1.6-27.2) times more likely to develop CIN 2-3 than those with prototype-like variants. A similar association was observed among women presenting to the sexually transmitted disease clinic (RR = 4.5; 95% CI = 0.9-23.8).Conclusions: This study suggests that the risk of developing CIN 2-3 is not the same with all variants of HPV16 and that nonprototype-like variants confer a greater risk compared with prototype-like variants. The important genomic differences underlying this increased risk of CIN 2-3 remain to be determined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) molecules, whose biological role is in the regulation of immune responses to foreign antigens and in discrimination of self from non-self antigens, are encoded by a series of closely linked genetic loci found on chromosome 6. Although the evidence for a link between HLA and cervical cancer has been controversial, it has been recently reported that certain HLA class II haplotypes (linked class II alleles) are positively associated with invasive cervical cancer, while other class II haplotypes are negatively associated or protective. Since HLA associations between human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16)-mediated cancer cases and non-HPV16-mediated cancer cases have been found to be different, this suggests that specific HLA class II haplotypes may influence the immune response to HPV infection and may affect the risk of acquiring invasive cervical carcinoma.Purpose: This study was conducted to determine if the same HLA class II haplotypes that are associated with invasive cervical carcinoma are also associated with cervical dysplasia (presumed precursors of invasive cervical cancer).Methods: We have examined HLA DR-DQ haplotypes among 128 Hispanic women from New Mexico with biopsy-confirmed cervical dysplasia in a case-control study using sensitive DNA-based polymerase chain reaction amplification and sequence-specific oligonucleotide probe hybridization methods to detect the presence and type of HPV and to detect allelic polymorphism in the HLA DRB1 and DQB1 loci.Results: Dysplasia cases were divided into two groups for comparison to controls: severe dysplasia/carcinoma in situ (CIS), and slight/moderate dysplasia. The frequency distribution of HLA class II haplotypes among the HPV16-positive severe dysplasia/CIS cases had a statistically significant (two-tailed P < .005) difference compared with controls, whereas haplotypes among the severe dysplasia/CIS cases containing HPV types other than HPV16 did not show statistically significant frequency differences. DR-DQ haplotypes previously found to be associated with HPV16-invasive cervical carcinomas were also associated with HPV16-positive severe dysplasia/CIS. However, no statistically significant haplotype frequency difference was observed between slight/moderate dysplasia cases and controls. In addition, we noted a DQA1-DQB1 haplotype negatively associated with severe dysplasia/CIS but not with invasive cervical cancers.Conclusions: Our results strongly suggest that certain HLA haplotypes confer an increased risk for severe cervical dysplasia and invasive cervical carcinoma following HPV16 infection.Implications: Further molecular studies are needed to identify HLA alleles or haplotypes that may provide increased susceptibility to HPV-associated cervical disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides information on the human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) discovered in a U.S. study in 2003. The HPV vaccine is said to reduce the incidence of both HPV infection and HPV-16-related cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. The double-blind study involved a number of women between the ages of 16 and 23 years.

BACKGROUND: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) is the surrogate endpoint used in licensure trials of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. Vaccine efficacy against CIN3+, the immediate precursor to invasive cervical cancer, is more difficult to measure because of its lower incidence, but provides the most stringent evidence of potential cancer prevention. We report vaccine efficacy against CIN3+ and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) in the end-of-study analysis of PATRICIA (PApilloma TRIal against Cancer In young Adults). METHODS: Healthy women aged 15-25 years with no more than six lifetime sexual partners were included in PATRICIA, irrespective of their baseline HPV DNA status, HPV-16 or HPV-18 serostatus, or cytology. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine or a control hepatitis A vaccine via an internet-based central randomisation system using a minimisation algorithm to account for age ranges and study sites. The patients and study investigators were masked to allocated vaccine. The primary endpoint of PATRICIA has been reported previously. In the present end-of-study analysis, we focus on CIN3+ and AIS in the populations of most clinical interest, the total vaccinated cohort (TVC) and the TVC-naive. The TVC comprised all women who received at least one vaccine dose, approximating catch-up populations and including sexually active women (vaccine n=9319; control=9325). The TVC-naive comprised women with no evidence of oncogenic HPV infection at baseline, approximating early adolescent HPV exposure (vaccine n=5824; control=5820). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00122681. FINDINGS: Vaccine efficacy against CIN3+ associated with HPV-16/18 was 100% (95% CI 85·5-100) in the TVC-naive and 45·7% (22·9-62·2) in the TVC. Vaccine efficacy against all CIN3+ (irrespective of HPV type in the lesion and including lesions with no HPV DNA detected) was 93·2% (78·9-98·7) in the TVC-naive and 45·6% (28·8-58·7) in the TVC. In the TVC-naive, vaccine efficacy against all CIN3+ was higher than 90% in all age groups. In the TVC, vaccine efficacy against all CIN3+ and CIN3+ associated with HPV-16/18 was highest in the 15-17 year age group and progressively decreased in the 18-20 year and 21-25 year age groups. Vaccine efficacy against all AIS was 100% (31·0-100) and 76·9% (16·0-95·8) in the TVC-naive and TVC, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 835 (9·0%) and 829 (8·9%) women in the vaccine and control groups, respectively; only ten events (0·1%) and five events (0·1%), respectively, were considered to be related to vaccination. INTERPRETATION: PATRICIA end-of-study results show excellent vaccine efficacy against CIN3+ and AIS irrespective of HPV DNA in the lesion. Population-based vaccination that incorporates the HPV-16/18 vaccine and high coverage of early adolescents might have the potential to substantially reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this interim analysis of a large, international phase III study was to assess the efficacy of an AS04 adjuvanted L1 virus-like-particle prophylactic candidate vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 in young women.Methods: 18,644 women aged 15-25 years were randomly assigned to receive either HPV16/18 vaccine (n=9319) or hepatitis A vaccine (n=9325) at 0, 1, and 6 months. Of these women, 88 were excluded because of high-grade cytology and 31 for missing cytology results. Thus, 9258 women received the HPV16/18 vaccine and 9267 received the control vaccine in the total vaccinated cohort for efficacy, which included women who had prevalent oncogenic HPV infections, often with several HPV types, as well as low-grade cytological abnormalities at study entry and who received at least one vaccine dose. We assessed cervical cytology and subsequent biopsy for 14 oncogenic HPV types by PCR. The primary endpoint--vaccine efficacy against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+ associated with HPV16 or HPV18--was assessed in women who were seronegative and DNA negative for the corresponding vaccine type at baseline (month 0) and allowed inclusion of lesions with several oncogenic HPV types. This interim event-defined analysis was triggered when at least 23 cases of CIN2+ with HPV16 or HPV18 DNA in the lesion were detected in the total vaccinated cohort for efficacy. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with the US National Institutes of Health clinical trial registry, number NCT00122681.Findings: Mean length of follow-up for women in the primary analysis for efficacy at the time of the interim analysis was 14.8 (SD 4.9) months. Two cases of CIN2+ associated with HPV16 or HPV18 DNA were seen in the HPV16/18 vaccine group; 21 were recorded in the control group. Of the 23 cases, 14 (two in the HPV16/18 vaccine group, 12 in the control group) contained several oncogenic HPV types. Vaccine efficacy against CIN2+ containing HPV16/18 DNA was 90.4% (97.9% CI 53.4-99.3; p<0.0001). No clinically meaningful differences were noted in safety outcomes between the study groups.Interpretation: The adjuvanted HPV16/18 vaccine showed prophylactic efficacy against CIN2+ associated with HPV16 or HPV18 and thus could be used for cervical cancer prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled phase II study was done to assess the efficacy of a prophylactic quadrivalent vaccine targeting the human papillomavirus (HPV) types associated with 70% of cervical cancers (types 16 and 18) and with 90% of genital warts (types 6 and 11). METHODS: 277 young women (mean age 20.2 years [SD 1.7]) were randomly assigned to quadrivalent HPV (20 microg type 6, 40 microg type 11, 40 microg type 16, and 20 microg type 18) L1 virus-like-particle (VLP) vaccine and 275 (mean age 20.0 years [1.7]) to one of two placebo preparations at day 1, month 2, and month 6. For 36 months, participants underwent regular gynaecological examinations, cervicovaginal sampling for HPV DNA, testing for serum antibodies to HPV, and Pap testing. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of infection with HPV 6, 11, 16, or 18, or cervical or external genital disease (ie, persistent HPV infection, HPV detection at the last recorded visit, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, cervical cancer, or external genital lesions caused by the HPV types in the vaccine). Main analyses were done per protocol. FINDINGS: Combined incidence of persistent infection or disease with HPV 6, 11, 16, or 18 fell by 90% (95% CI 71-97, p<0.0001) in those assigned vaccine compared with those assigned placebo. INTERPRETATION: A vaccine targeting HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18 could substantially reduce the acquisition of infection and clinical disease caused by common HPV types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cervical cancer screening has reduced morbidity and mortality in many countries, but efforts to optimize screening modalities and schedules are ongoing. Using data from a randomized trial conducted in British Columbia, Canada, in conjunction with a provincial screening registry, Gottschlich and colleagues demonstrated that the estimated risk for precancerous disease (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 or worse) at 8 years following a negative human papillomavirus (HPV) test was similar to the current standard of care (Pap testing after 3 years). The study supports extending screening intervals for those with a negative HPV test beyond currently recommended 5-year intervals. In an ideal world, the resources saved through less frequent routine cervical screening could be redirected to increasing screening uptake and follow-up of abnormalities to improve equity in cervical cancer prevention. However, implementation of extending screening intervals remains less than straightforward in settings with fragmented healthcare systems that lack information systems to support patient call/recall, such as the United States. To achieve the full promise of primary HPV testing, stakeholders at every level must commit to identifying and addressing the diverse spectrum of barriers that undergird existing inequities in care access, appropriately resource implementation strategies, and improve health information systems. See related article by Gottschlich et al., p. 904., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: The US Food and Drug Administration supports innovations to facilitate new indications for high-risk human papillomavirus testing. This report describes the retrospective testing of stored specimens and analysis of existing data to efficiently and cost-effectively support a new indication for the Onclarity human papillomavirus assay (Becton, Dickinson and Company, BD Life Sciences - Integrated Diagnostic Solutions, Sparks, MD). The performance of this index test was compared with that of a predicate test, the cobas human papillomavirus assay (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN). Both human papillomavirus assays are based on real-time polymerase chain reaction platforms that detect the presence of 14 high-risk human papillomavirus genotypes. The predicate assay reports human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 as individual results and the other 12 human papillomavirus genotypes as 1 pooled result. The index assay reports 9 independent results (human papillomavirus types 16, 18, 31, 33/58, 35/39/68, 45, 51, 52, and 56/59/66). Both the index and predicate assays are approved by the Food and Drug Administration for cervical cancer screening, but at the time that this study was initiated, the index human papillomavirus assay was not approved for use with cervical specimens collected in PreservCyt (Hologic, Inc, San Diego, CA) liquid-based cytology media., Objective: The performance of the index human papillomavirus assay was compared with that of the predicate human papillomavirus assay for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 or greater and 3 or greater (≥CIN2 or ≥CIN3) using PreservCyt liquid-based cytology specimens collected from women aged 21 to 65 years. In addition, the ability of the index test's extended genotyping to stratify ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risks, using these specimens, was evaluated., Study Design: The New Mexico HPV Pap Registry was used to select an age- and cytology-stratified random sample of 19,879 women undergoing opportunistic cervical screening and follow-up in routine clinical practice across New Mexico. A subset (n = 4820) of PreservCyt specimens was selected from 19,879 women for paired testing by the index and predicate human papillomavirus assays within age and cytology strata and included women with or without cervical biopsy follow-up. Point estimate differences and ratios were calculated for cervical disease detection and positivity rates, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals to determine statistical significance. The cumulative risk of ≥CIN2 or ≥CIN3, with up to 5-year follow-up, was estimated for the index assay using Kaplan-Meier methods., Results: The 5-year cumulative ≥CIN3 detection rates were 5.6% for the index assay and 4.6% for the predicate assay (difference, 1.0%; 95% confidence interval, 0.5%-1.5%). The ≥CIN3 positivity rates within <1 year were 95.3% for the index assay and 94.5% for the predicate assay (ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.06). The ≥CIN3 cumulative positivity rates for the index and predicate assays were also similar at 5 years. Among cases of ≥CIN3, the positive agreement rates between the index and predicate assays for human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 were 100.0% (95% confidence interval, 95.0%-100.0%) and 90.9% (95% confidence interval, 62.3%-98.4%), respectively. Human papillomavirus type 16 carried the highest ≥CIN2 or ≥CIN3 risk, followed by human papillomavirus types 18/31/33/58/52/45 and human papillomavirus types 35/56/59/51/56/59/66., Conclusion: The index and predicate human papillomavirus assays demonstrated equivalent performance, and extended human papillomavirus genotyping, using the index assay, provided effective ≥CIN2 and ≥CIN3 risk stratification, supporting a new indication for use of the index assay with PreservCyt., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for cervical screening increases diagnosis of precancer and reduces the incidence of cervical cancer more than cytology alone. However, real-world evidence from diverse practice settings is lacking for the United States (U.S.) to support clinician adoption of primary HPV screening. Using a population-based registry, which captures all cervical cytology (with or without HPV testing) and all cervical biopsies, we conducted a real-world evidence study of screening in women aged 30 to 64 years across the entire state of New Mexico. Negative cytology was used to distinguish cotests from reflex HPV tests. A total of 264 198 cervical screening tests (with exclusions based on clinical history) were recorded as the first screening test between 2014 and 2017. Diagnoses of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 or 3 or greater (CIN2+, CIN3+) from 2014 to 2019 were the main outcomes. Of cytology-negative screens, 165 595 (67.1%) were cotests and 4.8% of these led to biopsy within 2 years vs 3.2% in the cytology-only group. Among cytology-negative, HPV tested women, 347 of 398 (87.2%) CIN2+ cases were diagnosed in HPV-positive women, as were 147 of 164 (89.6%) CIN3+ cases. Only 29/921 (3.2%) CIN3+ and 67/1964 (3.4%) CIN2+ cases were diagnosed in HPV-negative, cytology-positive women with biopsies. Under U.S. opportunistic screening, across a diversity of health care delivery practices, and in a population suffering multiple disparities, we show adding HPV testing to cytology substantially increased the yield of CIN2+ and CIN3+. CIN3+ was rarely diagnosed in HPV-negative women with abnormal cytology, supporting U.S. primary HPV-only screening., (© 2023 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Objectives: Reproducibility of cervical biopsy diagnoses is low and may vary based on where the diagnostic test is performed and by whom. Our objective was to measure multilevel variation in diagnoses across colposcopists, pathologists, and laboratory facilities., Methods: We cross-sectionally examined variation in cervical biopsy diagnoses within the 5 sites of the Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR I) consortium within levels defined by colposcopists, pathologists, and laboratory facilities. Patients aged 18 to 65 years with a colposcopy with biopsy performed were included, with diagnoses categorized as normal, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 (CIN1), grade 2 (CIN2), and grade 3 (CIN3). Using Markov Chain Monte-Carlo methods, we fit mixed-effects logistic regression models for biopsy diagnoses and presented median odds ratios (MORs), which reflect the variability within each level. Median odds ratios can be interpreted as the average increased odds a patient would have for a given outcome (e.g., CIN2 or CIN3 vs normal or CIN1) when switching to a provider with higher odds of diagnosing that outcome. The MOR is always 1 or greater, and a value of 1 indicates no variation in outcome for that level, with higher values indicating greater variation., Results: A total of 130,110 patients were included who received care across 82 laboratory facilities, 2,620 colposcopists, and 489 pathologists. Substantial variation in biopsy diagnoses was found at each level, with the most occurring between laboratory facilities, followed by pathologists and colposcopists. Substantial variation in biopsy diagnoses of CIN2 or CIN3 (vs normal or CIN1) was present between laboratory facilities (MOR: 1.26; 95% credible interval = 1.19-1.36)., Conclusions: Improving consistency in cervical biopsy diagnoses is needed to reduce underdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and unnecessary treatment resulting from variation in cervical biopsy diagnoses., Competing Interests: The authors have declared they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023, ASCCP.)

Background: Potential care gaps in the cervical cancer screening process among women diagnosed with cervical cancer in an era with increased human papillomavirus (HPV) testing have not been extensively evaluated., Methods: Women diagnosed with cervical cancer between ages 21 and 65 at four study sites between 2010 and 2014 were included. Screening histories were ascertained from 0.5 to 4 years prior to cervical cancer diagnosis. We identified potential care gaps in the screening history for each woman and classified them into one of three mutually exclusive types: lack of a screening test, screening test failure, and diagnostic/treatment care gap. Distributions of care gaps were tabulated by stage, histology, and study site. Multivariable nominal logistic regression was used to examine the associations between demographic and cancer characteristics and type of care gap., Results: Of 499 women evaluated, 46% lacked a screening test in the time window examined, 31% experienced a screening test failure, and 22% experienced a diagnostic/treatment care gap. More than half of the women with advanced cancer and squamous cell carcinoma lacked a screening test compared to 31% and 24% of women with localized cancer and adenocarcinoma, respectively. Women aged 21-29 at diagnosis were more likely to experience screening test failure and diagnostic/treatment care gap, while those aged 50-65 were more likely to lack a screening test, compared to women aged 30-39., Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate a continuing need to develop interventions targeting unscreened and under-screened women and improve detection and diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in women undergoing cervical cancer screening and diagnostic follow-up., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Methylation of host and viral genes is promising for triage of women with high-risk human papillomavirus infections (hrHPV). Using a population-based sample of hrHPV positive women with cervical biopsies within 12 months after cervical screening, the clinical value of the S5 methylation classifier (S5), HPV genotyping and cytology were compared as potential triage tests, for outcomes of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 3 or greater (CIN3+), CIN2+ and CIN2, and the area under the curve (AUC) calculated. S5 scores increased with histopathology severity (P trend  < .001). For CIN3+, the AUC was 0.780 suggesting S5 provides good discrimination between

Background: Estimates of the humoral immune response to incident human papillomavirus (HPV) infections are limited., Methods: In this post hoc analysis of 3875 women aged 16-23 years from a 4-valent HPV vaccine trial (NCT00092482), HPV seroprevalence on day 1 was measured with a 9-valent HPV (HPV 6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58) competitive Luminex immunoassay and compared with cervical/external genital HPV detection by polymerase chain reaction. In the control group, among women who were HPV DNA‒negative on day 1, seroconversion following initial HPV detection was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods., Results: Type-specific HPV seropositivity among women with no day 1 cervical/external genital HPV detection was 0.6%-3.6%. Women with any 9-valent HPV (9vHPV) cervical/external genital detection (796/3875; 20.5%) had concordant seropositivity ranging from 13.4% (HPV 45) to 38.5% (HPV 6). Among women in the control group who were negative for all HPV types on day 1, seroconversion by month 30 after initial detection ranged from 29% (HPV 45) to 75% (HPV 16)., Conclusions: Humoral immune response to HPV is variable and dynamic, depending on type-specific exposure. This longitudinal analysis provides insight into the relationship between incident infection and seropositivity., Clinicaltrials: gov; NCT00092482 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00092482., (Copyright © 2022 Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The shift towards primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening has necessitated the search for a secondary triage test that provides sufficient sensitivity to detect high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cancer, but also brings an improved specificity to avoid unnecessary clinical work and colposcopy referrals. We evaluated the performance of the previously described DNA-methylation test (S5) in detecting CIN3 and cancers from diverse geographic settings in high-, medium- and low-income countries, using the cut-off of 0.80 and exploratory cut-offs of 2.62 and 3.70. Assays were performed using exfoliated cervical specimens (n = 808) and formalin-fixed biopsies (n = 166) from women diagnosed with cytology-negative results (n = 220), CIN3 (n = 204) and cancer stages I (n = 245), II (n = 249), III (n = 28) and IV (n = 22). Methylation increased proportionally with disease severity (Cuzick test for trend, P < .0001). S5 accurately separated women with negative-histology from CIN3 or cancer (P < .0001). At the 0.80 cut-off, 543/544 cancers were correctly identified as S5 positive (99.81%). At cut-off 3.70, S5 showed a sensitivity of 95.77% with improved specificity. The S5 odds ratios of women negative for cervical disease vs CIN3+ were significantly higher than for HPV16/18 genotyping at all cut-offs (all P < .0001). At S5 cut-off 0.80, 96.15% of consistently high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-negative cancers (tested with multiple hrHPV-genotyping assay) were positive by S5. These cancers may have been missed in current primary hrHPV-screening programmes. The S5 test can accurately detect CIN3 and malignancy irrespective of geographic context and setting. The test can be used as a screening and triage tool. Adjustment of the S5 cut-off can be performed considering the relative importance given to sensitivity vs specificity., (© 2021 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)