Jessica A Kahn1, Lea E Widdice1, Lili Ding1, Bin Huang1, Darron R Brown2, Eduardo L Franco3, David I Bernstein1. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center and the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Ohio. 2. Department of Medicine and Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis. 3. Department of Oncology and Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McGill University Faculty of Medicine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine effectiveness and herd protection are not well established in community settings. Our objective was to determine trends in vaccine-type HPV in young women during the 8 years after vaccine introduction, to assess changes in HPV prevalence and characterize herd protection in a community. METHODS: We recruited 3 samples of sexually experienced, 13-26-year-old adolescent girls and young women (hereafter women; N = 1180) from 2006-2014: before widespread vaccine introduction (wave 1) and 3 (wave 2) and 7 (wave 3) years after vaccine introduction. We determined the prevalence of vaccine-type HPV (HPV-6, -11, -16, and -18) among all, vaccinated, and unvaccinated women at waves 1, 2, and 3, adjusted for differences in participant characteristics, then examined whether changes in HPV prevalence were significant using inverse propensity score-weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: Vaccination rates increased from 0% to 71.3% across the 3 waves. Adjusted vaccine-type HPV prevalence changed from 34.8% to 8.7% (75.0% decline) in all women, from 34.9% to 3.2% (90.8% decline) in vaccinated women, and from 32.5% to 22.0% (32.3% decline) in unvaccinated women. Among vaccinated participants, vaccine-type HPV prevalence decreased significantly from wave 1 to wave 2 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, .13-.34) and from wave 1 to wave 3 (0.06; .03-.13). The same decreases were also significant among unvaccinated participants (adjusted odds ratios, 0.44; [95% confidence interval, .27-.71] and 0.59; [.35-.98], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of vaccine-type HPV decreased >90% in vaccinated women, demonstrating high effectiveness in a community setting, and >30% in unvaccinated women, providing evidence of herd protection.
BACKGROUND:Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine effectiveness and herd protection are not well established in community settings. Our objective was to determine trends in vaccine-type HPV in young women during the 8 years after vaccine introduction, to assess changes in HPV prevalence and characterize herd protection in a community. METHODS: We recruited 3 samples of sexually experienced, 13-26-year-old adolescent girls and young women (hereafter women; N = 1180) from 2006-2014: before widespread vaccine introduction (wave 1) and 3 (wave 2) and 7 (wave 3) years after vaccine introduction. We determined the prevalence of vaccine-type HPV (HPV-6, -11, -16, and -18) among all, vaccinated, and unvaccinated women at waves 1, 2, and 3, adjusted for differences in participant characteristics, then examined whether changes in HPV prevalence were significant using inverse propensity score-weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: Vaccination rates increased from 0% to 71.3% across the 3 waves. Adjusted vaccine-type HPV prevalence changed from 34.8% to 8.7% (75.0% decline) in all women, from 34.9% to 3.2% (90.8% decline) in vaccinated women, and from 32.5% to 22.0% (32.3% decline) in unvaccinated women. Among vaccinated participants, vaccine-type HPV prevalence decreased significantly from wave 1 to wave 2 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, .13-.34) and from wave 1 to wave 3 (0.06; .03-.13). The same decreases were also significant among unvaccinated participants (adjusted odds ratios, 0.44; [95% confidence interval, .27-.71] and 0.59; [.35-.98], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of vaccine-type HPV decreased >90% in vaccinated women, demonstrating high effectiveness in a community setting, and >30% in unvaccinated women, providing evidence of herd protection.
Authors: P E Gravitt; C L Peyton; T Q Alessi; C M Wheeler; F Coutlée; A Hildesheim; M H Schiffman; D R Scott; R J Apple Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Lauri E Markowitz; Susan Hariri; Elizabeth R Unger; Mona Saraiya; S Deblina Datta; Eileen F Dunne Journal: Vaccine Date: 2010-02-25 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Eric P F Chow; Jennifer A Danielewski; Glenda Fehler; Sepehr N Tabrizi; Matthew G Law; Catriona S Bradshaw; Suzanne M Garland; Marcus Y Chen; Christopher K Fairley Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2015-07-19 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: K Kavanagh; K G J Pollock; A Potts; J Love; K Cuschieri; H Cubie; C Robertson; M Donaghy Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Chelse Spinner; Lili Ding; David I Bernstein; Darron R Brown; Eduardo L Franco; Courtney Covert; Jessica A Kahn Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2019-01-22 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Emmanuel Chandler; Lili Ding; Pamina Gorbach; Eduardo L Franco; Darron A Brown; Lea E Widdice; David I Bernstein; Jessica A Kahn Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Natoshia M Askelson; Grace Ryan; Laura Seegmiller; Felicia Pieper; Bethany Kintigh; Donald Callaghan Journal: J Community Health Date: 2019-08
Authors: Mónica Saccucci; Eduardo L Franco; Lili Ding; David I Bernstein; Darron Brown; Jessica A Kahn Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Courtney Covert; Lili Ding; Darron Brown; Eduardo L Franco; David I Bernstein; Jessica A Kahn Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2019-02-20 Impact factor: 3.452