Vaccine Effectiveness Against 12-Month Incident and Persistent Anal Human Papillomavirus Infection Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine effectiveness (VE) against longitudinal outcomes is lacking among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM). We compared 12-month incidence and persistence of anal HPV infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated GBM. METHODS: We recruited GBM aged 16-30 years in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, Canada, from 2017 to 2019. Participants were followed over a median of 12 months (interquartile range, 12-13 months). Participants self-reported HPV vaccination and self-collected anal specimens for HPV DNA testing. We calculated prevalence ratios (PR) for 12-month cumulative incidence and persistence with ≥1 quadrivalent vaccine type (HPV 6/11/16/18) between vaccinated (≥1 dose at baseline) and unvaccinated participants using a propensity score-weighted, modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Among 248 participants, 109 (44.0%) were vaccinated at baseline, of whom 62.6% received 3 doses. PRs for HPV 6/11/16/18 were 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], .24-1.31) for cumulative incidence and 0.53 (95% CI, .25-1.14) for persistence. PRs were 0.23 (95% CI, .05-1.03) and 0.08 (95% CI, .01-.59) for incidence and persistence, respectively, among participants who received their first dose at age ≤23 years and 0.15 (95% CI, .03-.68) and 0.12 (95% CI, .03-.54) among participants who were sexually active for ≤5 years before vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support national recommendations for HPV vaccination at younger ages or soon after sexual debut.

Dimensions of Misinformation About the HPV Vaccine on Instagram: Content and Network Analysis of Social Media Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is a major advancement in cancer prevention and this primary prevention tool has the potential to reduce and eliminate HPV-associated cancers; however, the safety and efficacy of vaccines in general and the HPV vaccine specifically have come under attack, particularly through the spread of misinformation on social media. The popular social media platform Instagram represents a significant source of exposure to health (mis)information; 1 in 3 US adults use Instagram. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to characterize pro- and anti-HPV vaccine networks on Instagram, and to describe misinformation within the anti-HPV vaccine network. METHODS: From April 2018 to December 2018, we collected publicly available English-language Instagram posts containing hashtags #HPV, #HPVVaccine, or #Gardasil using Netlytic software (n=16,607). We randomly selected 10% of the sample and content analyzed relevant posts (n=580) for text, image, and social media features as well as holistic attributes (eg, sentiments, personal stories). Among antivaccine posts, we organized elements of misinformation within four broad dimensions: 1) misinformation theoretical domains, 2) vaccine debate topics, 3) evidence base, and 4) health beliefs. We conducted univariate, bivariate, and network analyses on the subsample of posts to quantify the role and position of individual posts in the network. RESULTS: Compared to provaccine posts (324/580, 55.9%), antivaccine posts (256/580, 44.1%) were more likely to originate from individuals (64.1% antivaccine vs 25.0% provaccine; P<.001) and include personal narratives (37.1% vs 25.6%; P=.003). In the antivaccine network, core misinformation characteristics included mentioning #Gardasil, purporting to reveal a lie (ie, concealment), conspiracy theories, unsubstantiated claims, and risk of vaccine injury. Information/resource posts clustered around misinformation domains including falsification, nanopublications, and vaccine-preventable disease, whereas personal narrative posts clustered around different domains of misinformation, including concealment, injury, and conspiracy theories. The most liked post (6634 likes) in our full subsample was a positive personal narrative post, created by a non-health individual; the most liked post (5604 likes) in our antivaccine subsample was an informational post created by a health individual. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying characteristics of misinformation related to HPV vaccine on social media will inform targeted interventions (eg, network opinion leaders) and help sow corrective information and stories tailored to different falsehoods.

Routine Childhood Vaccines Given From 1 through 18 Years of Age.

In addition to the vaccines due in the first year of life, the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that children continue to receive vaccines regularly against a variety of infectious diseases. Starting at 12 to 15 months of life, these include the two-dose measles-mumps-rubella vaccine series and the two-dose varicella vaccine series. Also in the second year of life, infants should begin the two-dose hepatitis A vaccine series and complete the Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccine series as well as the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine series. Before 19 months of life, infants should receive the third dose of the poliovirus vaccine and the fourth dose of diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine. The final doses of poliovirus and tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccines are both due at 4 to 6 years of life. Before each influenza season, every child should receive the influenza vaccine. Those less than 9 years of age who previously received less than two doses need two doses a month apart. At 11 to 12 years of life, all should get two doses of the human papillomavirus vaccine, the adolescent/adult version of the tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine, and begin a two-dose series of meningococcal ACWY vaccine. Each of these vaccines is due when the vaccine works to protect against both an immediate risk as well as to provide long-term protection. Each vaccine-preventable disease varies in terms of the nature of exposure, the form of the morbidity, the risk of mortality, and potential to prevent or ameliorate its harm.

Public-private knowledge transfer and access to medicines: a systematic review and qualitative study of perceptions and roles of scientists involved in HPV vaccine research.

BACKGROUND: Public research organizations and their interactions with industry partners play a crucial role for public health and access to medicines. The development and commercialization of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines illustrate how licensing practices of public research organizations can contribute to high prices of the resulting product and affect accessibility to vulnerable populations. Efforts by the international community to improve access to medicines have recognised this issue and promote the public health-sensitive management of research conducted by public research organizations. This paper explores: how medical knowledge is exchanged between public and private actors; what role inventor scientists play in this process; and how they view the implementation of public health-sensitive knowledge exchange strategies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic qualitative literature review on medical knowledge exchange and qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of public sector scientists working on HPV vaccines. We explored the strategies by which knowledge is exchanged across institutional boundaries, how these strategies are negotiated, and the views of scientists regarding public health-sensitive knowledge exchange. RESULTS: We included 13 studies in the systematic review and conducted seven semi-structured interviews with high-ranking scientists. The main avenues of public-private medical knowledge exchange were publications, formal transfer of patented knowledge, problem-specific exchanges such as service agreements, informal exchanges and collaborative research. Scientists played a crucial role in these processes but appeared to be sceptical of public health-sensitive knowledge exchange strategies, as these were believed to deter corporate interest in the development of new medicines and thus risk the translation of the scientists' research. CONCLUSION: Medical scientists at public research institutions play a key role in the exchange of knowledge they generate and are concerned about the accessibility of medicines resulting from their research. Their scepticism towards implementing public health-sensitive knowledge management strategies appears to be based on a biased understanding of the costs and risks involved in drug development and a perceived lack of alternatives to private engagement. Scientists could be encouraged to exchange knowledge in a public health-sensitive manner through not-for-profit drug development mechanisms, education on industry engagement, and stronger institutional and legal backing.

"I can be the Judge of What's Serious": A Qualitative Pilot Study of Parents' Responses to Messaging About Side Effects of the HPV Vaccine.

OBJECTIVE: Parents' concerns about vaccine safety and side effects likely contribute to low rates of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination among adolescents. To facilitate parent-provider discussions about the HPV vaccine, we developed and tested the content of a clinical decision support application for implementation in pediatric clinical settings. This study sought to elicit perspectives of parents and providers on the best way to communicate information on vaccine side effects. METHODS: To understand the acceptability of the application's content, we conducted focus groups with parents (n = 11) and providers (n = 9) at three primary care clinics. Focus groups transcriptions were analyzed using iterations of deductive and inductive coding, with independent coding by two trained reviewers to improve inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: Surprisingly, when parents reviewed screen shots of HPV vaccine safety and side effect messages, parents took exception to the expression "no evidence of serious side effects". Parents wanted side effects listed explicitly so they could decide for themselves which side effects were "serious". Parents also felt that the HPV vaccine did have serious side effects, and the wording undermined their trust in the vaccine messaging overall. Providers accepted the phrasing of side effects and did not express concerns that parents would object to the messaging. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to confirm parents' concerns with the phrasing "no serious side effects" for the HPV vaccine and to assess the impact on HPV vaccination deferral or delay.

Temporal Trends in the Incidence of Anogenital Warts: Impact of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Studies in countries with high human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage have demonstrated marked reductions in anogenital wart (AGW) incidence. Our goal was to assess the impact of HPV vaccination in a population with suboptimal coverage by comparing AGW incidence trends in the years before and after vaccine introduction. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of AGW incidence trends using an ecologic study design among 11- through 39-year-olds enrolled at Kaiser Permanente Northwest. We defined incidence as the proportion of persons who had a new AGW diagnosis for each calendar year in the prevaccine periods (2000 through 2006 for female individuals, 2000 through 2010 for male individuals) and the postvaccine periods (2007 through 2016 for female individuals, 2011 through 2016 for male individuals). We also described cumulative HPV vaccination coverage. RESULTS: The average annual AGW incidence rates in the prevaccine periods were 27.8 per 10,000 in female individuals and 26.9 per 10,000 in male individuals. In the postvaccine periods, AGW incidence rates decreased by 31% (P < 0.001) in female individuals and 10% (P = 0.006) in male individuals; the largest reductions were observed in 15- to 19-year-old female individuals (67%, P < 0.001) and male individuals (45%, P < 0.001). Three dose HPV coverage rates were less than 50% in all age groups and both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: In a population of young adults with moderate HPV vaccination coverage, we observed declines in AGW incidence among both female and male year after the introduction of HPV vaccination. The largest incidence reductions were observed in 15- to 19-year-olds who were most likely to have been vaccinated.

Going beyond the individual: how state-level characteristics relate to HPV vaccine rates in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is an underutilized cancer control practice in the United States. Although individual contextual factors are known to impact HPV vaccine coverage rates, the impact of macro-level elements are still unclear. The aim of this analysis was to use HPV vaccination rates to explore the underuse of an evidence-based cancer control intervention and explore broader-level correlates influencing completion rates. METHODS: A comprehensive database was developed using individual-level date from the National Immunization Survey (NIS)-Teen (2016) and state-level data collected from publically available sources to analyze HPV vaccine completion. Multi-level logistic models were fit to identify significant correlates. Level-1 (individual) and level-2 (state) correlates were fitted to a random intercept model. Deviance and AIC assessed model fit and sampling weights were applied. RESULTS: The analysis included 20,495 adolescents from 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. Teen age, gender, race/ethnicity, and maternal education were significant individual predictors of HPV completion rates. Significant state-level predictors included sex education policy, religiosity, and HPV vaccine mandate. States with the lowest HPV coverage rates were found to be conservative and highly religious. Little variation in vaccine exemptions and enacted sex and abstinence education polices were observed between states with high and low HPV vaccine coverage suggesting various contextual and situational factors impact HPV vaccine completion rates. CONCLUSIONS: Given that gender, religiosity, political ideology, and education policies are predictors of HPV vaccine completion, the interaction and underlying mechanism of these factors can be used to address the underutilization of the HPV vaccine.

Human papillomavirus vaccination update: Nonavalent vaccine and the two-dose schedule.

BACKGROUND: Australia has included quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in its national program since 2007. Significant declines have been observed in the incidence of HPV infection, genital warts and high-grade cervical lesions. In 2018, the program changed to a nonavalent HPV vaccine administered over a routine two-dose schedule for the target cohort of adolescents aged 12-13 years. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the nonavalent HPV vaccine, the rationale for its use and expected outcomes, and to review the updated dose scheduling requirements for HPV vaccines. DISCUSSION: The nonavalent HPV vaccine will broaden the impact of HPV vaccination, primarily against cervical cancer and pre-cancer. A two-dose schedule with an interval of 6-12 months between doses is appropriate for those aged ≤14 years at the time of first dose. Older individuals and those who are immunocompromised should continue to receive the three-dose schedule at zero, two and six months.

Vaccination for Human Papillomavirus: Immunization Practices in the U.S. Military

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection and is a leading etiology for cancer. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends routine vaccination of males and females aged 11-26 years. Studies suggest that U.S. military service members have higher HPV incidence rates and lower vaccination rates compared to the national average. Although the U.S. military enforces many recommended vaccines, the HPV vaccine fails to make the list.

A novel candidate HPV vaccine: MS2 phage VLP displaying a tandem HPV L2 peptide offers similar protection in mice to Gardasil-9.

Human papillomaviruses (HPVs) cause approximately 5% of cancer cases worldwide. Fortunately, three prophylactic vaccines have been approved to protect against HPV infections. Gardasil-9, the most recent HPV vaccine, is predicted to offer protection against the HPV types that cause ∼90% of cervical cancer, 86% of HPV-associated penile cancers, and ∼93% of HPV-associated head & neck cancers. As an alternative to Gardasil-9, we developed and tested a novel candidate vaccine targeting conserved epitopes in the HPV minor capsid protein, L2. We displayed a tandem HPV31/16L2 peptide (amino acid 17-31) or consensus peptides from HPV L2 (amino acid 69-86 or 108-122) on the surface of bacteriophage MS2 virus-like particles (VLPs). Mice immunized with the MS2 VLPs displaying the tandem peptide or immunized with a mixture of VLPs (displaying the tandem peptide and consensus peptide 69-86) elicited high titer antibodies against individual L2 epitopes. Moreover, vaccinated mice were protected from cervicovaginal infection with HPV pseudoviruses 16, 31, 45, 58 and sera from immunized mice neutralized HPV pseudoviruses 18 and 33 at levels similar to mice immunized with Gardasil-9. These results suggest that immunization with a tandem, L2 peptide or a low valency mixture of L2 peptide-displaying VLPs can provide broad protection against multiple HPV types.

Human papillomavirus vaccination coverage using two-dose or three-dose schedule criteria.

In October 2016, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) updated the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination recommendation to include a 2-dose schedule for U.S. adolescents initiating the vaccine series before their 15th birthday. We analyzed records for >4million persons aged 9-17years receiving any HPV vaccine by the end of each quarter during January 1, 2014-September 30, 2016 from six Immunization Information Systems Sentinel Sites, and reclassified HPV vaccination up-to-date coverage according to the updated recommendations. Compared with HPV vaccination up-to-date coverage by the 3-dose schedule only, including criteria for either a 2-dose or 3-dose schedule increased up-to-date coverage in 11-12, 13-14, and 15-17 year-olds by 4.5-8.5 percentage points. The difference between 3-dose up-to-date coverage and 2- or 3-dose up-to-date coverage was greatest in late 2016. These data provide baseline HPV vaccination coverage using current ACIP recommendations.

Human papillomavirus vaccines: WHO position paper, May 2017-Recommendations.

This article presents the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations on the use of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines excerpted from the WHO position paper on Human papillomavirus vaccines: WHO position paper, May 2017, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper replaces the 2014 WHO position paper on HPV vaccines [2]. The position paper focuses primarily on the prevention of cervical cancer, but also considers the broader spectrum of cancers and other diseases preventable by HPV vaccination. It incorporates recent developments concerning HPV vaccines, including the licensure of a nonavalent (9-valent) vaccine and recent data on vaccine effectiveness, and provides guidance on the choice of vaccine. New recommendations are proposed regarding vaccination strategies targeting girls only or both girls and boys, and vaccination of multiple birth cohorts [3]. Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO's current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. Recommendations on the use of HPV vaccines were discussed by SAGE in October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: www.who.int/immunization/sage/meetings/2016/october/presentations_background_docs/en/.

Immunizations for adult women.

Immunizations protect individual persons and contribute to public health by reducing morbidity and mortality associated with common infectious diseases. In this Practice Pearl, we review guidelines for adult immunizations and recent and potential changes in vaccines.