Epidemiology of genital warts in the British population: implications for HPV vaccination programmes.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of, and describe risk factors for, genital warts (GWs) in the British population, following the introduction of the bivalent (human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18) vaccination programme in girls, and prior to the switch to quadrivalent (HPV-6/11/16/18) vaccine (offering direct protection against GWs) and compare this with GW diagnoses in the prevaccination era. METHODS: Natsal-3, a probability sample survey in Britain, conducted in 2010-2012, interviewed 9902 men and women aged 16-44. Natsal-2, conducted in 1999-2001, surveyed 11 161 men and women aged 16-44. Both surveys collected data on sexual behaviour and sexually transmitted infection diagnoses using computer-assisted interview methods. RESULTS: In Natsal-3, 3.8% and 4.6% of sexually experienced men and women reported ever having a diagnosis of GWs, with 1.3% of men and 1.7% of woman reporting a GWs diagnosis in the past 5 years. GWs were strongly associated with increasing partner numbers and condomless sex. Diagnoses were more frequent in men who have sex with men (MSM) (11.6% ever, 3.3% past 5 years) and in women reporting sex with women (10.8% ever, 3.6% past 5 years). In the age group who were eligible for vaccination at the time of Natsal-3 (16-20 years), a similar proportion of same-aged women reported a history of GWs in Natsal-2 (1.9%, 1.1-3.4) and Natsal-3 (2.6%, 1.5-4.4). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide essential parameters for mathematical models that inform cost-effectiveness analyses of HPV vaccination programmes. There was no evidence of population protection against GWs conferred by the bivalent vaccine. Even with vaccination of adolescent boys, vaccination should be offered to MSM attending sexual health clinics.

Impact and Cost-effectiveness of Selective Human Papillomavirus Vaccination of Men Who Have Sex With Men.

Background: Men who have sex with men (MSM) have a high lifetime risk of anogenital warts and cancers related to infection with human papillomavirus (HPV). They also benefit less from herd protection than heterosexual males in settings with female-only HPV vaccination. Methods: We evaluated the potential health impact and cost-effectiveness of offering vaccination to MSM who visit genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics. We used a mathematical model of HPV 6/11/16/18 sexual transmission within an MSM population in England, parameterized with sexual behaviour, GUM attendance, HPV prevalence, HIV prevalence, warts, and cancer incidence data. Interventions considered were offering HPV vaccination to either HIV-positive MSM or MSM regardless of HIV status, for age bands 16-25, 16-30, 16-35, and 16-40 years. Results: Substantial declines in anogenital warts and male HPV-related cancer incidence are projected to occur following an offer of vaccination to MSM. MSM not attending GUM clinics will partially benefit from herd protection. Offering vaccination to HIV-positive MSM up to age 40 is likely to be cost-effective if vaccine procurement and administration costs are below £96.50 a dose. At £48 a dose, offering vaccination to all MSM up to age 40 is likely to be cost-effective. Conclusions: Quadrivalent HPV vaccination of MSM via GUM clinics is likely to be an effective and cost-effective way of reducing the burden of HPV-related disease in MSM.

Population-level impact and herd effects following human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programmes were first implemented in several countries worldwide in 2007. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the population-level consequences and herd effects after female HPV vaccination programmes, to verify whether or not the high efficacy reported in randomised controlled clinical trials are materialising in real-world situations. METHODS: We searched the Medline and Embase databases (between Jan 1, 2007 and Feb 28, 2014) and conference abstracts for time-trend studies that analysed changes, between the pre-vaccination and post-vaccination periods, in the incidence or prevalence of at least one HPV-related endpoint: HPV infection, anogenital warts, and high-grade cervical lesions. We used random-effects models to derive pooled relative risk (RR) estimates. We stratified all analyses by age and sex. We did subgroup analyses by comparing studies according to vaccine type, vaccination coverage, and years since implementation of the vaccination programme. We assessed heterogeneity across studies using I(2) and χ(2) statistics and we did trends analysis to examine the dose-response association between HPV vaccination coverage and each study effect measure. FINDINGS: We identified 20 eligible studies, which were all undertaken in nine high-income countries and represent more than 140 million person-years of follow-up. In countries with female vaccination coverage of at least 50%, HPV type 16 and 18 infections decreased significantly between the pre-vaccination and post-vaccination periods by 68% (RR 0·32, 95% CI 0·19-0·52) and anogenital warts decreased significantly by 61% (0·39, 0·22-0·71) in girls 13-19 years of age. Significant reductions were also recorded in HPV types 31, 33, and 45 in this age group of girls (RR 0·72, 95% CI 0·54-0·96), which suggests cross-protection. Additionally, significant reductions in anogenital warts were also reported in boys younger than 20 years of age (0·66 [95% CI 0·47-0·91]) and in women 20-39 years of age (0·68 [95% CI 0·51-0·89]), which suggests herd effects. In countries with female vaccination coverage lower than 50%, significant reductions in HPV types 16 and 18 infection (RR 0·50, 95% CI 0·34-0·74]) and in anogenital warts (0·86 [95% CI 0·79-0·94]) occurred in girls younger than 20 years of age, with no indication of cross-protection or herd effects. INTERPRETATION: Our results are promising for the long-term population-level effects of HPV vaccination programmes. However, continued monitoring is essential to identify any signals of potential waning efficacy or type-replacement. FUNDING: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.