Expected impact of MRI-targeted biopsy interreader variability among uropathologists on ProScreen prostate cancer screening trial: a pre-trial validation study.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer (PCa) histology, particularly the Gleason score, is an independent prognostic predictor in PCa. Little is known about the inter-reader variability in grading of targeted prostate biopsy based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The aim of this study was to assess inter-reader variability in Gleason grading of MRI-targeted biopsy among uropathologists and its potential impact on a population-based randomized PCa screening trial (ProScreen). METHODS: From June 2014 to May 2018, 100 men with clinically suspected PCa were retrospectively selected. All men underwent prostate MRI and 86 underwent targeted prostate of the prostate. Six pathologists individually reviewed the pathology slides of the prostate biopsies. The five-tier ISUP (The International Society of Urological Pathology) grade grouping (GG) system was used. Fleiss' weighted kappa (κ) and Model-based kappa for associations were computed to estimate the combined agreement between individual pathologists. RESULTS: GG reporting of targeted prostate was highly consistent among the trial pathologists. Inter-reader agreement for cancer (GG1-5) vs. benign was excellent (Model-based kappa 0.90, Fleiss' kappa κ = 0.90) and for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (GG2-5 vs. GG0 vs. GG1), it was good (Model-based kappa 0.70, Fleiss' kappa κ 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Inter-reader agreement in grading of MRI-targeted biopsy was good to excellent, while it was fair to moderate for MRI in the same cohort, as previously shown. Importantly, there was wide consensus by pathologists in assigning the contemporary GG on MRI-targeted biopsy suggesting high reproducibility of pathology reporting in the ProScreen trial.

Prostate Cancer Screening With PSA, Kallikrein Panel, and MRI: The ProScreen Randomized Trial.

Importance: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening has potential to reduce prostate cancer mortality but frequently detects prostate cancer that is not clinically important. Objective: To describe rates of low-grade (grade group 1) and high-grade (grade groups 2-5) prostate cancer identified among men invited to participate in a prostate cancer screening protocol consisting of a PSA test, a 4-kallikrein panel, and a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ProScreen trial is a clinical trial conducted in Helsinki and Tampere, Finland, that randomized 61 193 men aged 50 through 63 years who were free of prostate cancer in a 1:3 ratio to either be invited or not be invited to undergo screening for prostate cancer between February 2018 and July 2020. Interventions: Participating men randomized to the intervention underwent PSA testing. Those with a PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or higher underwent additional testing for high-grade prostate cancer with a 4-kallikrein panel risk score. Those with a kallikrein panel score of 7.5% or higher underwent an MRI of the prostate gland, followed by targeted biopsies for those with abnormal prostate gland MRI findings. Final data collection occurred through June 31, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: In descriptive exploratory analyses, the cumulative incidence of low-grade and high-grade prostate cancer after the first screening round were compared between the group invited to undergo prostate cancer screening and the control group. Results: Of 60 745 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 57.2 [4.0] years), 15 201 were randomized to be invited and 45 544 were randomized not to be invited to undergo prostate cancer screening. Of 15 201 eligible males invited to undergo screening, 7744 (51%) participated. Among them, 32 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.41%) and 128 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 1.65%) were detected, with 1 cancer grade group result missing. Among the 7457 invited men (49%) who refused participation, 7 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.1%) and 44 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.6%) were detected, with 7 cancer grade groups missing. For the entire invited screening group, 39 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.26%) and 172 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 1.13%) were detected. During a median follow-up of 3.2 years, in the group not invited to undergo screening, 65 low-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.14%) and 282 high-grade prostate cancers (cumulative incidence, 0.62%) were detected. The risk difference for the entire group randomized to the screening invitation vs the control group was 0.11% (95% CI, 0.03%-0.20%) for low-grade and 0.51% (95% CI, 0.33%-0.70%) for high-grade cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: In this preliminary descriptive report from an ongoing randomized clinical trial, 1 additional high-grade cancer per 196 men and 1 low-grade cancer per 909 men were detected among those randomized to be invited to undergo a single prostate cancer screening intervention compared with those not invited to undergo screening. These preliminary findings from a single round of screening should be interpreted cautiously, pending results of the study's primary mortality outcome. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03423303.

Early detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: protocol summary and statistical analysis plan for the ProScreen randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence on the effectiveness of prostate cancer screening based on prostate-specific antigen is inconclusive and suggests a questionable balance between benefits and harms due to overdiagnosis, and complications from biopsies and overtreatment. However, diagnostic accuracy studies have shown that detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer can be reduced by MRI combined with targeted biopsies.The aim of the paper is to describe the analysis of the ProScreen randomised trial to assess the performance of the novel screening algorithm in terms of the primary outcome, prostate cancer mortality and secondary outcomes as intermediate indicators of screening benefits and harms of screening. METHODS: The trial aims to recruit at least 111 000 men to achieve sufficient statistical power for the primary outcome. Men will be allocated in a 1:3 ratio to the screening and control arms. Interim analysis is planned at 10 years of follow-up, and the final analysis at 15 years. Difference between the trial arms in prostate cancer mortality will be assessed by Gray's test using intention-to-screen analysis of randomised men. Secondary outcomes will be the incidence of prostate cancer by disease aggressiveness, progression to advanced prostate cancer, death due to any cause and cost-effectiveness of screening. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial protocol was reviewed by the ethical committee of the Helsinki University Hospital (2910/2017). Results will be disseminated through publications in international peer-reviewed journals and at scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03423303.

Population-based randomized trial of screening for clinically significant prostate cancer ProScreen: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of a population-based screening trial using prostate-specific antigen (PSA), a kallikrein panel and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) aimed at minimizing overdiagnosis, while retaining mortality benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Feasibility of the screening algorithm was evaluated in terms of participation, screening test results and cancer detection. A random sample of 400 men aged 65 years was identified from the population registry and invited for screening with three stepwise tests (PSA, kallikrein panel and MRI). Men with PSA levels ≥3 ng/mL were further tested with the kallikrein panel, and those with positive findings (risk >7.5%) were referred for prostate MRI. Men with positive MRI (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score 3-5) had targeted biopsies only. Men with negative MRI, but PSA density ≥0.15 underwent systematic biopsies. RESULTS: Of the 399 men invited, 158 (40%) participated and 27 had PSA levels ≥3 ng/mL (7% of the invited and 17% of the participants). Of these, 22 had a positive kallikrein panel (6% of the invited and 81% of the PSA-positive men). Finally, 10 men (3% of the invited and 45% of 4Kscore [kallikrein panel]-positive) had a suspicious MRI finding (PI-RADS score ≥3) and five were diagnosed with a clinically significant prostate cancer (Gleason Grade Group [GG] ≥2) at fusion biopsy (3% of the participants), with two GG 1 cases (1%). Additional testing (kallikrein panel and MRI) after PSA reduced biopsies by 56%. CONCLUSION: The findings constitute proof of principle for our screening protocol, as we achieved a substantial detection rate for clinically significant cancer with few clinically insignificant cases. Participation, however, was suboptimal.

Effectiveness of various human papillomavirus vaccination strategies: A community randomized trial in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted a community-randomized trial (NCTBLINDED) in Finland to assess gender-neutral and girls-only vaccination strategies with the AS04-adjuvanted human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 (AS04-HPV-16/18)vaccine. METHODS: Girls and boys (12-15 years) were invited. We randomized 33 communities (1:1:1 ratio): Arm A: 90% of randomly selected girls and boys received AS04-HPV-16/18 vaccine and 10% received hepatitis B vaccine (HBV); Arm B: 90% of randomly selected girls received AS04-HPV-16/18 vaccine, 10% of girls received HBV, and all boys received HBV; Arm C: all participants received HBV. Effectiveness measurements against prevalence of HPV-16/18 cervical infection were estimated in girls at 18.5 years. The main measures were: (1) overall effectiveness comparing Arms A or B, regardless of vaccination status, vs Arm C; (2) total effectiveness comparing AS04-HPV-16/18 vaccinated girls in pooled Arms A/B vs Arm C; (3) indirect effectiveness (herd effect) comparing girls receiving HBV or unvaccinated in Arm A vs Arm C. Co-primary objectives were overall effectiveness following gender-neutral or girls-only vaccination. RESULTS: Of 80,272 adolescents invited, 34,412 were enrolled. Overall effectiveness was 23.8% (95% confidence interval: -19.0, 51.1; P = 0.232) with gender-neutral vaccination. Following girls-only vaccination, overall effectiveness was 49.6% (20.1, 68.2; P = 0.004). Total effectiveness was over 90% regardless of vaccination strategy. No herd effect was found. Immunogenicity of the AS04-HPV-16/18 vaccine was high in both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrates the difficulty in conducting community randomized trials. It is not plausible that vaccinating boys would reduce overall effectiveness, and the apparent lack of herd effect was unexpected given findings from other studies. This analysis was likely confounded by several factors but confirms the vaccine's high total effectiveness as in clinical trials.

Expected impact of MRI-related interreader variability on ProScreen prostate cancer screening trial: a pre-trial validation study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the potential impact of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) -related interreader variability on a population-based randomized prostate cancer screening trial (ProScreen). METHODS: From January 2014 to January 2018, 100 men aged 50-63 years with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa) in Helsinki University Hospital underwent MRI. Nine radiologists individually reviewed the pseudonymized MRI scans of all 100 men in two ProScreen trial centers. All 100 men were biopsied according to a histological composite variable comprising radical prostatectomy histology (N = 38) or biopsy result within 1 year from the imaging (N = 62). Fleiss' kappa (κ) was used to estimate the combined agreement between all individual radiologists. Sample data were subsequently extrapolated to 1000-men subgroups of the ProScreen cohort. RESULTS: Altogether 89% men of the 100-men sample were diagnosed with PCa within a median of 2.4 years of follow-up. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was identified in 76% men. For all PCa, mean sensitivity was 79% (SD ±10%, range 62-96%), and mean specificity 60% (SD ±22%, range 27-82%). For csPCa (Gleason Grade 2-5) MRI was equally sensitive (mean 82%, SD ±9%, range 67-97%) but less specific (mean 47%, SD ±20%, range 21-75%). Interreader agreement for any lesion was fair (κ 0.40) and for PI-RADS 4-5 lesions it was moderate (κ 0.60). Upon extrapolating these data, the average sensitivity and specificity to a screening positive subgroup of 1000 men from ProScreen with a 30% prevalence of csPCa, 639 would be biopsied. Of these, 244 men would be true positive, and 395 false positive. Moreover, 361 men would not be referred to biopsy and among these, 56 csPCas would be missed. The variation among the radiologists was broad as the least sensitive radiologist would have twice as many men biopsied and almost three times more men would undergo unnecessary biopsies. Although the most sensitive radiologist would miss only 2.6% of csPCa (false negatives), the least sensitive radiologist would miss every third. CONCLUSIONS: Interreader agreement was fair to moderate. The role of MRI in the ongoing ProScreen trial is crucial and has a substantial impact on the screening process.

Vaccination With Moderate Coverage Eradicates Oncogenic Human Papillomaviruses If a Gender-Neutral Strategy Is Applied.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of girls with very high (>90%) coverage has the potential to eradicate oncogenic HPVs, but such high coverage is hard to achieve. However, the herd effect (HE) depends both on the HPV type and the vaccination strategy. METHODS: We randomized 33 Finnish communities into gender-neutral HPV16/18 vaccination, girls-only HPV16/18 vaccination, and hepatitis B virus vaccination arms. In 2007-2010, 11 662 of 20 513 of 40 852 of 39 420 resident boys/girls from 1992 to 1995 birth cohorts consented. In 2010-2014, cervicovaginal samples from vaccinated and unvaccinated girls at age 18.5 years were typed for HPV6/11/16/18/31/33/35/39/45/51/52/56/58/59/66/68. Vaccine efficacy for vaccinated girls, HE for unvaccinated girls, and the protective effectiveness (PE) for all girls were estimated. We extended the community-randomized trial results about vaccination strategy with mathematical modeling to assess HPV eradication. RESULTS: The HE and PE estimates in the 1995 birth cohort for HPV18/31/33 were significant in the gender-neutral arm and 150% and 40% stronger than in the girls-only arm. Concordantly, HPV18/31/33 eradication was already predicted in adolescents/young adults in 20 years with 75% coverage of gender-neutral vaccination. With the 75% coverage, eventual HPV16 eradication was also predicted, but only with the gender-neutral strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Gender-neutral vaccination is superior for eradication of oncogenic HPVs.

Effectiveness of the AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 vaccine in reducing oropharyngeal HPV infections in young females-Results from a community-randomized trial.

We studied effectiveness of the AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 (AS04-HPV-16/18) vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) oropharyngeal infections associated with the increase of head/neck cancers in western countries. All 38,631 resident adolescents from 1994 to 1995 birth cohorts of 33 Finnish communities were invited in this community-randomized trial (NCT00534638). During 2008-2009, 11,275 girls and 6,129 boys were enrolled in three arms of 11 communities each. In Arm A, 90% of vaccinated girls/boys, and in Arm B, 90% of vaccinated girls received AS04-HPV-16/18 vaccine. Other Arm A/B and all Arm C vaccinated participants received control vaccine. All Arm A participants and Arm B female participants were blinded to vaccine allocation. Oropharyngeal samples were analyzed from 4,871 18.5-year-old females who attended follow-up visit 3-6 years postvaccination. HPV DNA prevalence was determined by SPF-10 LiPA and Multiplex type-specific PCR. Total vaccine effectiveness (VE) was defined as relative reduction of oropharyngeal HPV prevalence in pooled Arms A/B HPV-vaccinated females vs. all Arm C females. VE against oropharyngeal HPV-16/18, HPV-31/45 and HPV-31/33/45 infections were 82.4% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 47.3-94.1), 75.3% (95%CI: 12.7-93.0) and 69.9% (95% CI: 29.6-87.1), respectively. In conclusion, the AS04-HPV-16/18 vaccine showed effectiveness against vaccine and nonvaccine HPV-types oropharyngeal infections in adolescent females up to 6 years postvaccination.

The Prevalence of HSV, HHV-6, HPV and Mycoplasma genitalium in Chlamydia trachomatis positive and Chlamydia trachomatis Negative Urogenital Samples among Young Women in Finland.

Chlamydia trachomatis, Mycoplasma genitalium, herpes simplex virus (HSV) and human papillomavirus (HPV) cause sexually transmitted infections. In addition, human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6) may be a genital co-pathogen. The prevalence rates of HSV, HHV-6, HPV, M. genitalium, and the C. trachomatis ompA genotypes were investigated by PCR in urogenital samples of the C. trachomatis nucleic acid amplification test positive (n = 157) and age-, community- and time-matched negative (n = 157) women. The prevalence of HPV DNA was significantly higher among the C. trachomatis positives than the C. trachomatis negatives (66% vs. 25%, p < 0.001). The prevalence of HSV (1.9% vs. 0%), HHV-6 (11% vs. 14%), and M. genitalium DNA (4.5% vs. 1.9%) was not significantly different between the C. trachomatis-positive and -negative women. Thirteen per cent of test-of-cure specimens tested positive for C. trachomatis. The prevalence of HSV, HHV-6, HPV, M. genitalium, and the C. trachomatis ompA genotypes did not significantly differ between those who cleared the C. trachomatis infection (n = 105) and those who did not (n = 16). The higher prevalence of HPV DNA among the C. trachomatis positives suggests greater sexual activity and increased risk for sexually transmitted pathogens.

Gender-neutral vaccination provides improved control of human papillomavirus types 18/31/33/35 through herd immunity: Results of a community randomized trial (III).

With optimal strategy, human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines have the potential to control HPV. We have assessed vaccine efficacy (VE), herd effect (HE) of HPV vaccination and overall protective effectiveness (PE) against high-risk HPV infections by HPV type and vaccination strategy in a community-randomized trial using the bivalent HPV16/18 vaccine. We randomized 33 communities to gender-neutral HPV vaccination (Arm A), HPV vaccination of girls and hepatitis B-virus (HBV) vaccination of boys (Arm B) and gender-neutral HBV vaccination (Arm C). Entire 1992-1995 male (40,852) and female (39,420) birth cohorts were invited, and 11,662 males and 20,513 females vaccinated with 20-30% and 45% coverage in 2007-2010. During 2010-2014, 11,396 cervicovaginal samples were collected from 13,545 18.5-year-old attendees. HPV typing was performed by a high-throughput PCR. VE was calculated for HPV vaccinated women and HE for non-HPV-vaccinated women, using the HBV vaccinated, for HE all non-HPV vaccinated, Arm C women as controls. PE was calculated as coverage rate-weighted mean of VE + HE. HPV16/18/45 and 31/33/35 VEs varied between 86-94% and 30-66%, respectively. Only the gender-neutral vaccination provided significant HEs against HPV18 (61%) and HPV31 (72%) in the 1995 birth cohort-increased HEs against HPV33 (39%) and HPV35 (42%) were also observed. Due to the increased HEs, PEs for HPV16/18/45 and HPV31/33/35 were comparable in the gender-neutral arm 1995 birth cohort. High vaccine efficacy against HPV16/18/45 and, gender-neutral vaccination-enforced, herd effect against HPV18/31/33/35 by the bivalent vaccine rapidly provides comparable overall protective effectiveness against six oncogenic HPV types: 16/18/31/33/35/45.

Evaluation of HPV type-replacement in unvaccinated and vaccinated adolescent females-Post-hoc analysis of a community-randomized clinical trial (II).

Efficacy of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines promises to control HPV infections. However, HPV vaccination programs may lay bare an ecological niche for non-vaccine HPV types. We evaluated type-replacement by HPV type and vaccination strategy in a community-randomized trial executed in HPV vaccination naïve population. Thirty-three communities were randomized to gender-neutral vaccination with AS04-adjuvanted HPV16/18 vaccine (Arm A), HPV vaccination of girls and hepatitis B-virus (HBV) vaccination of boys (Arm B) and gender-neutral HBV vaccination (Arm C). Resident 1992-95 born boys (40,852) and girls (39,420) were invited. 11,662 boys and 20,513 girls were vaccinated with 20-30% and 45-48% coverage, respectively. HPV typing of 11,396 cervicovaginal samples was performed by high throughput PCR. Prevalence ratios (PR) between arms and ranked order of HPV types and odds ratio (OR) for having multiple HPV types in HPV16 or 18/45 positive individuals were calculated. The ranked order of HPV types did not significantly differ between arms or birth cohorts. For the non-HPV vaccinated 1992-1993 birth cohorts increased PR, between the gender-neutral intervention versus control arms for HPV39 (PRA 1.84, 95% CI 1.12-3.02) and HPV51 (PRA 1.56, 95% CI 1.11-2.19) were observed. In the gender-neutral arm, increased clustering between HPV39 and the vaccine-covered HPV types 16 or 18/45 (ORA16 = 5.1, ORA18/45 = 11.4) was observed in the non-HPV vaccinated 1994-1995 birth cohorts. Comparable clustering was seen between HPV51 and HPV16 or HPV18/45 (ORB16 = 4.7, ORB18/45 = 4.3), in the girls-only arm. In conclusion, definitively consistent postvaccination patterns of HPV type-replacement were not observed. Future occurrence of HPV39 and HPV51 warrant investigation.

Impact of gender-neutral or girls-only vaccination against human papillomavirus-Results of a community-randomized clinical trial (I).

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is efficacious but the real-life effectiveness of gender-neutral and girls-only vaccination strategies is unknown. We report a community-randomized trial on the protective effectiveness [(PE) = vaccine efficacy (VE) + herd effect (HE)] of the two strategies among females in virtually HPV vaccination naïve population. We randomized 33 Finnish communities into Arm A) gender-neutral vaccination with AS04-adjuvanted HPV16/18 vaccine (11 communities), Arm B) HPV vaccination of girls and hepatitis B-virus (HBV) vaccination of boys (11 communities) or Arm C) gender-neutral HBV vaccination (11 communities). All resident 39,420 females and 40,852 males born 1992-95 were invited in 2007-09. Virtually all (99%) 12- to 15-year-old participating males (11,662) and females (20,513) received three doses resulting in uniform 20-30% male and 50% female vaccination coverage by birth cohort. Four years later (2010-14) 11,396 cervicovaginal samples obtained from 18.5 year-old women were tested for HPV DNA, and prevalence of cervical HPV infections by trial arm and birth cohort was the main outcome measure. VEs against HPV16/18 varied between 89.2% and 95.2% across birth cohorts in arms A and B. The VEs against non-vaccine types consistent with cross-protection were highest in those born 1994-95 for HPV45 (VEA 82.8%; VEB 86.1%) and for HPV31 (VEA 77.6%, VEB 84.6%). The HEs in the non HPV-vaccinated were statistically significant in those born 1994-95 for HPV18 (HEA 51.0%; 95% CI 8.3-73.8, HEB 47.2%; 6.5-70.2) and for HPV31/33 in arm A (HEA 53.7%; 22.1-72.5). For HPV16 and 45 no significant herd effects were detected. PE estimates against HPV16/18 were similar by both strategies (PEA 58.1%; 45.1-69.4; PEB 55.7%; 42.9-66.6). PE estimates against HPV31/33 were higher by the gender-neutral vaccination (PEA 60.5%; 43.6-73.4; PEB 44.5%; 24.9-60.6). In conclusion, while gender-neutral strategy enhanced the effectiveness of HPV vaccination for cross-protected HPV types with low to moderate coverage, high coverage in males appears to be key to providing a substantial public health benefit also to unvaccinated females. Trial registration www.clinicaltrials.gov.com NCT000534638.

Cancer Registry follow-up for 17 million person-years of a nationwide maternity cohort.

Population-based Finnish Maternity Cohort (FMC) comprises 2M first trimester sera collected from 1M women during 33 years. Informed consent is by the opt-out principle, and linkages with cancer and population registries provide a base for over time and over generation studies. Follow-up for 17M person-years by the end of 2014 can identify 39,700 cases of invasive cancer and 18,900 cases of premalignant breast and cervix lesions, and basal cell carcinoma diagnosed after serum sampling. For women with multiple pregnancies, serial samples taken before cancer diagnosis are available. Offspring of the women have developed more than 4000 cancers. For 100,000 individuals, samples taken during the pregnancies of both their mothers and grandmothers enable familial cancer studies. FMC continues to collect samples, and surveillance of exposures or interventions like vaccination programs is feasible. In summary, the FMC is a unique, accessible biobank for epidemiological, biomarker, and surveillance studies on cancer.

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Prevalence in Male Adolescents 4 Years After HPV-16/18 Vaccination.

We assessed human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence among HPV-16/18-vaccinated and unvaccinated Finnish male adolescents participating in chlamydia screening 4 years after vaccination with AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 vaccine in 2007-2009. Previously vaccinated (n = 395) or unvaccinated (n = 149) male adolescents were enrolled in 12 municipalities. First-void urine samples were tested for HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68, and prevalence rates for HPV-16/18, and HPV-11/16/18/31/33/45 were reduced profoundly (0% vs 2.1% [P = .02] and 0.8% vs 5.3 [P = .002], respectively). Overall HPV DNA prevalence was also significantly reduced among HPV-16/18-vaccinated (4.1%) compared with unvaccinated subjects (10.1%) (P = .01). In this post hoc study, a highly significant reduction in HPV prevalence 4 years after vaccination suggests that the bivalent HPV-16/18 vaccine has protective efficacy in men.

Ten-year follow-up of human papillomavirus vaccine efficacy against the most stringent cervical neoplasia end-point-registry-based follow-up of three cohorts from randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: Due to long lag time between infection/cancer diagnoses human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programs will deliver vaccine efficacy (VE) estimates against cancer end-points late. Cancer registry follow-up of population-based, randomised trial cohorts of vaccinated and unvaccinated women was undertaken for the estimation of VE against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade three and invasive cancer (CIN3+). METHODS: We report interim results with 98 561 person years of Finnish Cancer Registry -based follow-up of individually and/or cluster randomised cohorts of HPV-16/18 vaccinated and unvaccinated adolescent women enrolled in June 2003/2005, and between May 2004 and April 2005, respectively. The cohorts comprised 15 627 18- to 19-year-old unvaccinated women (NCT01393470), and 2 401 and 64 16- to 17-year-old HPV-16/18 vaccinated women participating the PATRICIA (NCT00122681) and HPV-012 (NCT00169494) trials, respectively. The age-aligned passive follow-up started 6 months after the clinical trials' end. RESULTS: During the follow-up of 4.5 to 10 years post enrolment we identified 75 cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3) and 4 cases of invasive cervical cancer (ICC) in the unvaccinated cohort, and 4 CIN3 cases in the HPV-16/18 vaccinated women. Diagnostic blocks were available for HPV typing from 87% of the cases. CIN3+ lesions were detectable in 54 cases. HPV16 was found in 26 of 50 unvaccinated CIN3+ cases, and in 3 CIN3+ cases in the HPV-16/18 vaccinated women. The latter were all baseline positive for cervical HPV16 DNA. Baseline data was not available for the unvaccinated women. Intention-to-treat VE against any CIN3+ was 66% (95% CI 8, 88). CONCLUSIONS: Ten years post vaccination the AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 vaccine shows continued efficacy against CIN3+ irrespectively of HPV type. Vaccine efficacy was not observed in baseline HPV16 DNA positive subjects. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01393470.

Safety of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine in adolescents aged 12-15 years: Interim analysis of a large community-randomized controlled trial.

This community-randomized controlled trial was initiated to assess the overall and herd effects of 2 different human papillomavirus (HPV) immunization strategies in over 80,000 girls and boys aged 12-15 y in 33 communities in Finland (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00534638). Overall, 14,838 adolescents received HPV-16/18 vaccine (2,440 boys and 12,398 girls) and 17,338 received hepatitis-B virus (HBV) vaccine (9,221 boys and 8,117 girls). In an interim analysis, vaccine safety was assessed by active monitoring and surveillance via health registry linkage. Active monitoring showed that the HPV-16/18 vaccine has acceptable safety and reactogenicity in boys. In all study participants, the observed incidences (per 100,000 person-years) of serious adverse events (SAEs) possibly related to vaccination were 54.3 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 34.0-82.1) in the HPV-16/18 group and 64.0 (95% CI: 43.2-91.3) in the HBV group. During the follow-up period for this interim analysis, the most common new-onset autoimmune diseases (NOADs; with incidence rate ≥15 per 100,000) in any group based on hospital discharge registry (HILMO) download were ulcerative colitis, juvenile arthritis, celiac disease, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and Crohn's disease. No increased NOAD incidences were observed in HPV-16/18 vaccine recipients compared to HBV vaccine recipients. In both the SAE possibly related- and HILMO-analyses, a lower incidence of IDDM was observed in HPV-16/18 vaccinees compared to HBV vaccinees (relative risks, 0.26 [95% CI: 0.03-1.24] and 0.16 [95% CI: 0.03-0.55], respectively).

Characteristics of a cluster-randomized phase IV human papillomavirus vaccination effectiveness trial.

High-risk human papillomaviruses (hrHPV) cause anogenital and oropharyngeal cancers. HPV-16/18 virus-like particle vaccine formulated with an AS04 adjuvant is very efficacious against hrHPV associated precancers but the herd effects of different vaccination scenarios are not known. Our cluster randomized trial (NCT00534638) assesses the overall and herd effects of vaccinating girls vs. girls and boys. In two school-years (2007-2008 and 2008-2009) we invited 80,272 1992-1995 born early adolescents to a CRT in 33 communities a priori stratified by low, intermediate and high HPV-16/18 seroprevalence. In 11 Arm A communities 90% of participating girls and boys were assigned to receive HPV-16/18 vaccine, in 11 Arm B communities 90% of girls were assigned to receive HPV-16/18 vaccine - boys were assigned to receive hepatitis B-virus (HBV) vaccine, and in 11 Arm C communities all were assigned to receive HBV-vaccine. Prevalence of HPV in vaccinated and unvaccinated girls is studied at age 18.5 years. Recruitment resulted in equal enrolment of four birth cohorts (born 1992-1995) comprising altogether 32,175 (40% response) early adolescents: 20,514 girls (50.5-53.0% response by arm) and 11,661 boys (21.9-31.6%% response by arm). At the age of 15 years, 79.3% of the vaccinees completed a questionnaire. Among them >98% were living at, and during the week-ends 1.3-1.6% stayed outside, the study site communities. Smoking habit and alcohol consumption were similar in the different trial arms, also mean-age of menarche (12.4 years) and 1st ejaculation (12.6 years), and sexual behaviour (among those <25%, who had had sexual debut) did not differ by arm: mean-age at the sexual debut 14.3 and 14.4 in girls and boys, and proportions of those with multiple (≥5) life-time sexual partners (6.5-7.5%) at the age of 15 years. Uniform residential, life-style and sexual behaviour characteristics indicate successful randomization/enrolment of the CRT. Our CRT will verify modelled predictions on up to 31% herd effect of vaccinating both girls and boys with moderate vaccine coverage - quantifying overall effectiveness of different strategies which will soon guide how to implement HPV vaccination.

Understanding long-term protection of human papillomavirus vaccination against cervical carcinoma: Cancer registry-based follow-up.

Phase III clinical trials of human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination have shown ≥95% efficacy against HPV16/18 associated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) Grade 2/3. Long-term surveillance is, however, needed to determine the overall vaccine efficacy (VE) against CIN3 and invasive cervical carcinoma (ICC). During population-based recruitment between September 2002 and March 2003, 1,749 16- to 17-year old Finns participated in a multi-national randomized Phase III HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine (FUTURE II) trial for the determination of VE against HPV16/18 positive CIN2/3. The passive follow-up started at the country-wide, population-based Finnish Cancer Registry (FCR) six months after the active follow-up and voluntary cross-vaccination in April 2007. A cluster randomized, population-based reference cohort of 15,744 unvaccinated, originally 18-19 year old Finns was established in two phases in 2003 and 2005 after the FUTURE II recruitment. We linked these cohorts with the FCR in 2007-2011 (HPV vaccine and placebo cohorts) and 2006-2010 and 2008-2012 (unvaccinated reference cohorts 1 and 2) to compare their incidences of CIN3 and ICC. The four years passive follow-up resulted in 3,464, 3,444 and 62,876 person years for the HPV6/11/16/18, original placebo and reference cohorts, after excluding cases discovered during the clinical follow-up and individuals not at risk. The numbers of CIN3 and ICC cases identified were 0 and 0, 3 and 0, 59 and 3 for the HPV6/11/16/18, placebo and the unvaccinated reference cohorts. The corresponding CIN3 incidence rates were 0/100,000 (95% confidence interval 0.0-106.5), 87.1/100,000 (95% CI 17.9-254.5) and 93.8/100,000 (95% CI 71.4-121), respectively. Long-term surveillance up to 8 years (and longer) post vaccination of the HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine and placebo cohorts, and the unvaccinated reference cohort (not exposed to interventions) for the most stringent efficacy end-points by passive cancer registry-based follow-up is feasible.

Occurrence of vaccine and non-vaccine human papillomavirus types in adolescent Finnish females 4 years post-vaccination.

Control of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers by inclusion of HPV vaccination into national vaccination programmes is likely. One open question is replacement of the vaccine types with other high-risk (hr) HPV types in the vaccination era. We studied occurrence of HPV types in adolescent females participating in a population-based vaccination trial. A total of 4,808 16- to 17-year-old females from Finland were enrolled in the 1:1 randomized phase III (PATRICIA) trial of the efficacy of vaccination with the AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 virus-like particle vaccine as compared to hepatitis A virus (HAV) vaccine. HPV infection was assessed from cervical samples taken every 6 months for 4 years post-vaccination by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for genital oncogenic HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 58, 59, 66, 68, and 73 as well as low-risk types HPV-6 and HPV-11. The HPV-16/18 vaccine coverage ranged between 1 and 22% by age-cohort and study community. Odds ratios (ORs) for infections with different HPV types in baseline PCR negative HPV-16/18 vs. HAV vaccinated women, and Poisson regression derived HPV incidence rate ratios (IRRs) in baseline positive vs. negative women were calculated. The OR and IRR estimates for acquisition of any genital HPV types showed no excess risk neither in baseline HPV DNA-negative HPV-16/18-vaccinated women compared to baseline HPV DNA-negative HAV vaccinated women nor in HPV-16/18-vaccinated baseline HPV-16/18-positive women compared to baseline HPV-16/18-negative women. In the HAV-vaccinated, baseline HPV-18-positive women showed an increased risk of acquiring other clade A7 HPV types (39, 45, 59, 68) (IRR 1.8, 95% confidence interval = 1.01.-3.1). We found no increased occurrence of non-vaccine HPV types suggestive of type-replacement 1-4 years post-vaccination among HPV-16/18-vaccinated Finnish adolescents.