| Literature DB >> 32398057 |
André B Kind1, Andrew Pavelyev2,3, Smita Kothari2, Nadia El Mouaddin4, Aurélie Schmidt5, Edith Morais6, Patrik Guggisberg7, Florian Lienert8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) is the obligatory aetiological factor for the development of cervical cancer. In Switzerland, the prevention strategy for cervical cancer is based on primary prevention via HPV vaccination and secondary prevention with an opportunistic screening programme for precancerous lesions. Vaccination is recommended to 11-26 years old male and female persons. The objective of the study was to assess the epidemiological impact on cervical cancer of switching from the currently implemented programme with the 4-valent vaccine to the 9-valent vaccine, in an 11-26 years old gender-neutral vaccination programme in Switzerland.Entities:
Keywords: 9-valent HPV; Cervical cancer; Cervical disease; Epidemiology; Gender-neutral vaccination; HPV; HPV vaccination; Impact; Switzerland; Vaccination
Year: 2020 PMID: 32398057 PMCID: PMC7216682 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-08840-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Summary table on vaccine efficacy assumptions for HPV-related cervical cancer
| Vaccine assumptions | HPV 16 | HPV 18 | HPV 31/33/45/52/58 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vaccine efficacy for preventing cervical HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 infections: | |||
| Malea | 0.411 | 0.621 | 0.411 |
| Femaleb | 0.76 | 0.963 | 0.76 |
| Degree of protection of the vaccine against cervical HPV16/18 infections becoming persistent | 0.988 | 0.984 | 0.988 |
| Degree of protection of the vaccine against HPV16/18-related CIN | 0.979 | 1 | 0.979 |
aPreventing male genital infections through male vaccination is assumed to prevent transmission of genital infections to females
bPreventing female genital infections through vaccination is assumed to prevent transmission of genital infections to males
Source: Giuliano et al. (2011) [33] for males and Elbasha and Dasbach [30] for females
Fig. 1Epidemiological impact of two vaccination strategies on HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 infection prevalence among females over 100 years
Fig. 2Epidemiological impact of two vaccination strategies on HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 infection prevalence among males over 100 years
Disease events and deaths prevented with the two vaccination strategies associated with cervical screening
| HPV 16/18/31/33/45/52/58 related disease incidence cases and deaths | Years since start of vaccination programme | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 25 | 50 | 100 | |
| CIN1 cases- females | |||
| 4vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 3125 | 11,579 | 31,382 |
| 9vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 4278 | 16,146 | 44,084 |
| 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (nb of events avoided) | 1153 | 4567 | 12,702 |
| Cumulative incidence decrease, 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (%) | 10.4 | 27.1 | 49.8 |
| CIN2 cases- females | |||
| 4vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 3948 | 14,852 | 40,551 |
| 9vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 5321 | 20,254 | 55,552 |
| 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (nb of events avoided) | 1373 | 5401 | 15,000 |
| Cumulative incidence decrease, 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (%) | 9.8 | 25.6 | 47.8 |
| CIN3 cases- females | |||
| 4vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 4232 | 18,227 | 54,031 |
| 9vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 5224 | 22,789 | 67,893 |
| 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (nb of events avoided) | 991 | 4562 | 13,862 |
| Cumulative incidence decrease, 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (%) | 5.2 | 16.1 | 35.5 |
| Cervical cancer cases- females | |||
| 4vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 242 | 2316 | 10,414 |
| 9vHPV vs screening (nb of events avoided) | 305 | 2961 | 13,394 |
| 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (nb of events avoided) | 63 | 644 | 2979 |
| Cumulative incidence decrease, 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (%) | 1.2 | 7.1 | 24.2 |
| Cervical cancer deaths- females | |||
| 4vHPV vs screening (nb of deaths avoided) | 16 | 399 | 2554 |
| 9vHPV vs screening (nb of deaths avoided) | 20 | 512 | 3295 |
| 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (nb of events avoided) | 4 | 113 | 741 |
| Cumulative incidence decrease, 9vHPV vs 4vHPV (%) | 0.3 | 4.1 | 19.7 |
Fig. 3Epidemiological impact of two vaccination strategies on HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 related incidence of CIN1 over 100 years
Fig. 4Epidemiological impact of two vaccination strategies on HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 related incidence of CIN2 over 100 years
Fig. 5Epidemiological impact of two vaccination strategies on HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 related incidence of CIN3 over 100 years
Fig. 6Epidemiological impact of two vaccination strategies on HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 related cervical cancer incidence over 100 years
Fig. 7Epidemiological impact of two vaccination strategies on HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 related cervical cancer deaths over 100 years
Fig. 8Sensitivity analyses results – CIN1 and CIN2/3 incidence cases prevented with the two vaccination strategies
Fig. 9Sensitivity analyses results – Cervical cancer incidence cases and deaths prevented with the two vaccination strategies