Choosing the optimal HPV vaccine: The health impact and economic value of the nonavalent and bivalent HPV vaccines in 48 Gavi-eligible countries.

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines may provide some level of cross-protection against high-risk HPV genotypes not directly targeted by the vaccines. We evaluated the long-term health and economic impacts of routine HPV vaccination using either the nonavalent HPV vaccine or the bivalent HPV vaccine in the context of 48 Gavi-eligible countries. We used a multi-modeling approach to compare the bivalent with or without cross-protection and the nonavalent HPV vaccine. The optimal, that is, most cost-effective, vaccine was the vaccine with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the per-capita gross domestic product (GDP) for each country. By 2100 and assuming 70% HPV vaccination coverage, a bivalent vaccine without cross-protection, a bivalent vaccine with favorable cross-protection and the nonavalent vaccine were projected to avert 14.9, 17.2 and 18.5 million cumulative cases of cervical cancer across all 48 Gavi-eligible countries, respectively. The relative value of the bivalent vaccine compared to the nonavalent vaccine increased assuming a bivalent vaccine conferred high cross-protection. For example, assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of per-capita GDP, the nonavalent vaccine was optimal in 83% (n = 40) of countries if the bivalent vaccine did not confer cross-protection; however, the proportion of countries decreased to 63% (n = 30) if the bivalent vaccine conferred high cross-protection. For lower cost-effectiveness thresholds, the bivalent vaccine was optimal in a greater proportion of countries, under both cross-protection assumptions. Although the nonavalent vaccine is projected to avert more cases of cervical cancer, the bivalent vaccine with favorable cross-protection can prevent a considerable number of cases and would be considered a high-value vaccine for many Gavi-eligible countries.

Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Campaigns.

BACKGROUND: Data to inform evidence-based policy of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine delivery strategies in low- and middle-income countries are limited. We examined the cost-effectiveness of campaign compared with routine delivery strategies of adolescent female HPV vaccination in Uganda. METHODS: We used a multiple modeling approach that captured HPV transmission, cervical carcinogenesis, and population demographics to project health and economic outcomes associated with HPV vaccination. Costs included vaccination and operational costs and cervical cancer costs over the lifetimes of the current female population in Uganda. Health outcomes included number of cervical cancer cases and disability-adjusted life years (DALY). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (i.e., cost per DALY averted) were calculated and compared against gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. RESULTS: Compared with routine HPV vaccination of 9-year-old girls at 70% coverage, campaign vaccination yielded greater health benefits if campaigns occurred frequently and targeted a wide age range. Campaign delivery strategies were both less costly and more effective than routine HPV vaccination. Campaign vaccination of 9- to 30-year-old girls/women at a 3-year frequency (40% coverage) was considered cost-effective compared with the GDP per capita threshold for Uganda ($674 in U.S. 2015 dollars). CONCLUSIONS: We projected that campaign HPV vaccination would provide substantial population health benefits compared with routine vaccination. Expanding the target age range of campaign vaccination up to age 30 years may be an efficient strategy, depending on the achievable coverage level and campaign frequency. IMPACT: In settings where routine health systems infrastructure may be limited, reaching adolescent populations with a campaign delivery strategy may be an efficient use of resources.

[Cervical cancer: Current situation and management in Morocco]. / Le cancer du col de l'utérus : état des lieux et prévention au Maroc.

With more than 3300 new cases and almost 2500 deaths each year, cervical cancer (CC) ranks second among female cancers in Moroccan women. The majority of cases occurs in women aged 50 and over. In absence of a national cancer registry, data published in Morocco are limited to the number of cases recorded in some oncology centers, so the incidence of this cancer is likely much higher than estimated. A Moroccan national program against CC based on the practice of visual inspection after application of acetic acid was set up in 2010, allowing both screening and possibly immediate treatment of (pre)cancerous lesions. However, this program has not been implemented in all regions of the country. The CC develops slowly and most often without any symptoms, and so it is diagnosed at an advanced stage of the disease. Virtually, all CC are associated with persistent infection of high risk human papillomavirus (HPV), particularly HPV16 and 18. For more than ten years, two prophylactic vaccines targeting these two HPV genotypes have been marketed. They have proved their excellent immunogenicity and efficacy and they are well tolerated. However, HPV vaccine is not yet recommended by health authorities in Morocco. In this literature review, we focused on the current situation of CC, the prevalence of HPV infection and the prevention strategies against CC in Morocco.

Facilitators and barriers of human papillomavirus vaccine uptake in young females 18-26 years old in Singapore: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Around 70% of cervical cancers are caused by Types 16 and 18 of human papillomavirus (HPV). Vaccines against HPV have been shown to be safe and effective in preventing HPV and cervical cancer. OBJECTIVE: To explore the facilitators and barriers of HPV vaccination in young females aged 18-26 years in Singapore, and to describe their recommended strategies to improve the uptake of HPV vaccination. DESIGN: Qualitative, descriptive design guided by the socio-ecological model. PARTICIPANTS: Young women studying in National University of Singapore (NUS), aged 18-26 (N = 40). Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from various socio-economic levels and faculties, both vaccinated against HPV and unvaccinated. METHODS: In-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with the participants. IDIs and FGDs were transcribed and coded using NVIVO software. Thematic data analysis was performed using an inductive approach. RESULTS: Barriers to HPV vaccination included lack of awareness, lack of perceived risk for cervical cancer, cost, lack of parental support, inconvenience of getting the vaccination, stigma associated with connection with sexual activity, and concern regarding safety. Facilitators include parental encouragement, protection of one's health, lack of logistical barriers, and perceived safety and efficacy of the vaccine. Participants recommended increasing awareness of HPV vaccination and cervical cancer, reducing cost of vaccination and making the vaccine compulsory to increase vaccine uptake. CONCLUSION: Barriers and facilitators exist at different levels to influence vaccine uptake. Public education on cervical cancer and the vaccine should be stepped up to increase public awareness. A school-based national vaccination programme was proposed by the target group to increase the rate of uptake of HPV vaccination in Singapore.

Cost-Utility of a Two-Dose Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Programme Added to Cervical Cancer Screening Compared with Cervical Cancer Screening Alone in Korea

Background: Cervical cancer is caused by the human papillomavirus and is a leading cause of cancer death among young Korean women. Current screening programmes could benefit from the addition of HPV vaccination into their schedule to help reduce disease burden. Two-dose vaccination schedules targeting HPV types 16 and 18, which are responsible for most cervical cancer cases, have recently been approved. Of the two available vaccines, AS04-adjuvanted HPV16/18 vaccine (AS04-HPV16/18v) provides greater protection against non-vaccine oncogenic HPV, while HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine (4vHPVv) provides protection against genital warts. Methods: The health and economic consequences of introducing a two-dose HPV vaccination programme in 12-year-old girls together with screening were assessed in the Korean healthcare setting using a previously-published Markov model. Results: Compared with screening alone, AS04-HPV16/18v was cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below and within the Korean Won [KRW] 20-30 million treshold). When comparing the two vaccines, at 3% discount rate, AS04-HPV16/18v dominated 4vHPVv (i.e., provided 174 more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), 304 more life-years (LYs) and cost-savings of KRW 980 million). At a 5% discount rate, AS04-HPV16/18v provided comparable QALYs (albeit 5 fewer), 105 more LYs and cost-savings of KRW 292 million compared with 4vHPVv. Results were particularly sensitive to the discount rate used, as the health benefits of preventing cervical cancer are observed much later than those of preventing genital warts. Conclusion: For the Korean setting, HPV vaccination with a two-dose schedule is a cost-effective option, and AS04-HPV16/18v is likely to offer better health outcomes at a cost-saving compared with 4vHPVv.

Assessment of herd effects among women and heterosexual men after girls-only HPV16/18 vaccination in the Netherlands: A repeated cross-sectional study.

Data on the impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination on the population HPV prevalence are largely obtained from women. We assessed the impact of the girls-only HPV16/18 vaccination program in the Netherlands that started in 2009, on trends in HPV prevalence among women and heterosexual men, using data from the PASSYON study. In this cross-sectional study, the HPV prevalence among 16- to 24-year-old visitors to sexually transmitted infection clinics was assessed in 2009, 2011, 2013, and 2015. We compared the genital postvaccination HPV prevalence with the prevaccination prevalence (2009) using Poisson GEE models. In total, we included 4,996 women and 1,901 heterosexual men. The percentage of women who reported to be vaccinated increased from 2.3% in 2009 to 37% in 2015. Among all women, the HPV16/18 prevalence decreased from 23% prevaccination to 15% in 2015 (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 0.62, ptrend < 0.01). Among heterosexual men, the HPV16/18 prevalence decreased from 17% prevaccination to 11% in 2015 (aPR 0.52, ptrend < 0.01). Of the heterosexual men with a steady partner, HPV16/18 prevalence was lower among those whose steady partner had been vaccine-eligible in the national immunization program (aPR 0.13). Among unvaccinated women, the HPV16/18 prevalence in 2015 was not different from prevaccination. The decreasing HPV16/18 prevalence among heterosexual men and the reduced HPV16/18 prevalence among heterosexual men with a vaccine-eligible steady partner strongly suggests herd protection from girls-only vaccination. Absence of notable herd effects among unvaccinated women 6 years postvaccination may be due to the moderate vaccine uptake among girls in the Netherlands.

Ten years of HPV vaccination in the Netherlands: current evidence and future challenges in HPV-related disease prevention.

INTRODUCTION: Girls-only vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 and 18 was implemented in the Netherlands in 2009. Despite the evidence of the efficacy against precancerous lesions, cross-protection induced by the vaccine and a greater potential for cancer prevention than cervical cancer only, vaccine coverage in the girls-only program has remained below target levels. AREAS COVERED: In this paper, we review the literature from the Netherlands on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination since vaccine introduction, give an account of the coverage, safety and effectiveness of HPV vaccination as has been reported in the Dutch surveillance program and discuss challenges of the current HPV vaccination program. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Girls-only HPV vaccination may confer a substantial health gain in HPV-related disease prevention. However, vaccine coverage declined remarkably recently possibly related to safety concerns, limiting the benefits from girls' vaccination and increasing the potential additional benefit of sex-neutral HPV vaccination. Considering the emergence of novel vaccination and screening options and the change from cytology- to HPV-based screening in 2017, further research is required to inform decisions on the optimization of an integrated vaccination and screening program.

Health and economic benefits of single-dose HPV vaccination in a Gavi-eligible country.

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines for prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination recommend two doses for girls ages 9-14 years, several studies have demonstrated similar protection with one dose. Our objective was to evaluate the long-term health and economic impacts of routine one-dose HPV vaccination compared to (1) no vaccination and (2) two-dose HPV vaccination in a low-income country. METHODS: We used a three-tiered hybrid modeling approach that captured HPV transmission, cervical carcinogenesis, and population demographics to project long-term health and economic outcomes associated with one-dose HPV vaccination (assuming 80% efficacy against HPV-16/18 infections under three waning scenarios) and two-dose HPV vaccination (assuming 100% efficacy over the lifetime) in Uganda. Costs included the vaccine program (dosage and delivery) costs over a 10-year period and cervical cancer costs over the lifetimes of the current population of Ugandan women. Health outcomes included number of cervical cancer cases and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (i.e., cost per DALY averted) were calculated and compared against the Ugandan per-capita gross domestic product. RESULTS: Routine one-dose HPV vaccination of 9-year-old girls required substantial upfront investment but was cost-saving compared to no vaccination when accounting for the cost-offsets from future cancers averted. Forty years after initiating routine vaccination and depending on assumptions of vaccine waning, one-dose HPV vaccination with equivalent coverage (70%) averted 15-16% of cervical cancer cases versus 21% with two-dose vaccination but required only half the upfront economic investment. Vaccination with two doses had an attractive cost-effectiveness profile except if one-dose vaccination enabled higher coverage (90% vs. 70%) and did not wane. CONCLUSIONS: One-dose HPV vaccination resulted in cost-savings compared to no vaccination and could be cost-effective compared to two-dose vaccination if protection is longstanding and higher coverage can be achieved.

Characterization of an Escherichia coli-derived human papillomavirus type 16 and 18 bivalent vaccine.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 account for approximately 70% of cervical cancer worldwide. Neutralizing HPV prophylactic vaccines offer significant benefit, as they block HPV infection and prevent subsequent disease. However, the three licensed HPV vaccines that cover these two genotypes were produced in eukaryotic cells, which is expensive, particularly for low-income countries where HPV is highest. Here, we report a new HPV16 and -18 bivalent candidate vaccine produced from Escherichia coli. We used two strategies of N-terminal truncation of HPV L1 proteins and soluble non-fusion expression to generate HPV16 and HPV18 L1-only virus-like particles (VLPs) in a scalable process. Through comprehensive characterization of the bivalent candidate vaccine, we confirm lot consistency in a pilot scale-up of 30L, 100L and 500L. Using cryo-EM 3D reconstruction, we found that HPV16 and -18VLPs present in a T=7 icosahedral arrangement, similar in shape and size to that of the native virions. This HPV16/18 bivalent vaccine shares comparable immunogenicity with the licensed vaccines. Overall, we show that the production of a HPV16/18 bivalent vaccine from an E. coli expression system is robust and scalable, with potentially good accessibility worldwide as a population-based immunization strategy.

Geospatial Planning and the Resulting Economic Impact of Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Introduction in Mozambique.

BACKGROUND: Research has shown that the distance to the nearest immunization location can ultimately prevent someone from getting immunized. With the introduction of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine throughout the world, a major question is whether the target populations can readily access immunization. METHODS: In anticipation of HPV vaccine introduction in Mozambique, a country with a 2015 population of 25,727,911, our team developed Strategic Integrated Geo-temporal Mapping Application) to determine the potential economic impact of HPV immunization. We quantified how many people in the target population are reachable by the 1377 existing immunization locations, how many cannot access these locations, and the potential costs and disease burden averted by immunization. RESULTS: If the entire 2015 cohort of 10-year-old girls goes without HPV immunization, approximately 125 (111-139) new cases of HPV 16,18-related cervical cancer are expected in the future. If each health center covers a catchment area with a 5-km radius (ie, if people travel up to 5 km to obtain vaccines), then 40% of the target population could be reached to prevent 50 (44-55) cases, 178 (159-198) disability-adjusted life years, and US $202,854 (US $140,758-323,693) in health care costs and lost productivity. At higher catchment area radii, additional increases in catchment area radius raise population coverage with diminishing returns. CONCLUSIONS: Much of the population in Mozambique is unable to reach any existing immunization location, thereby reducing the potential impact of HPV vaccine. The geospatial information system analysis can assist in planning vaccine introduction strategies to maximize access and help the population reap the maximum benefits from an immunization program.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of AS04-adjuvanted human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine compared with human papillomavirus 6/11/16/18 vaccine in the Philippines, with the new 2-dose schedule.

Cervical cancer (CC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among Filipino women. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination protects against CC. Two vaccines (AS04-HPV-16/18 and 4vHPV) are approved in the Philippines; they were originally developed for a 3-dose (3D) administration and have recently been approved in a 2-dose schedule (2D). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination of 13-year-old Filipino girls, in addition to current screening, in the new 2D schedule. An existing static lifetime, one-year cycle Markov cohort model was adapted to the Philippine settings to simulate the natural history of low-risk and oncogenic HPV infection, the effects of screening and vaccination of a 13-year-old girls cohort vaccinated with either the 2D-AS04-HPV-16/18 or 2D-4vHPV assuming a 100% vaccination coverage. Incremental cost, quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and cost-effectiveness were derived from these estimates. Input data were obtained from published sources and Delphi panel, using country-specific data where possible. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model. The model estimated that 2D-AS04-HPV-16/18 prevented 986 additional CC cases and 399 CC deaths (undiscounted), as well as 555 increased QALY (discounted), and save 228.1 million Philippine pesos (PHP) compared with the 2D-4vHPV. In conclusion, AS04-HPV-16/18 is shown to be dominant over 4vHPV in the Philippines, with greater estimated health benefits and lower costs.

Estimating long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HPV 16/18 vaccine in China.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and 18 are the two most common HPV oncogenic types that can be prevented by vaccination. This study aimed at assessing the cost-effectiveness of 3 doses of the bivalent HPV vaccine in rural and urban settings in China. METHODS: A Markov model was adapted to reflect the lifetime of a modelled 100,000 12-year-old girls cohort in rural and urban settings in China. Input parameters were obtained from published literature, official reports and a two-round expert review panel. Clinical and economic outcomes of vaccination at age 12 with screening was compared to screening only. In the base case analysis, a 3 % discount rate, the vaccine cost of 247 CNY (US$ 39, PAHO vaccine cost in 2013), two rounds of screening in a life time and 70 % coverage for both screening and vaccination were used. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. We used different thresholds of cost-effectiveness to reflect the diversity of economic development in China. RESULTS: Vaccination in addition to screening could prevent 60 % more cervical cancer cases and deaths than screening only. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio varied largely when changing cost of vaccination and discount in one way analysis. Vaccination was very cost-effective when the vaccine cost ranged 87-630 CNY (US$ 13.8-100) in rural and 87-750 CNY (US$ 13.8-119) in urban; and remained cost-effective when the vaccine cost ranged 630-1,700 CNY (US$ 100-270) in rural and 750-1,900 CNY (US$ 119-302) in urban in two way analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that model results were robust. CONCLUSIONS: In both rural and urban, the vaccination cost and discounting are important factors determining the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination; policy makers in China should take these into account when making a decision on the introduction of HPV vaccine. In areas with a high burden of cervical cancer and limited screening activities, HPV vaccination should be prioritized. However, the vaccine cost needs to be reduced in order to make it very cost-effective and affordable as well, in particular in poverty areas with high disease burden.

Effectiveness of HPV vaccination in women reaching screening age in Italy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A randomized trial was conducted in Tuscany, Italy, to evaluate the effectiveness of HPV vaccination for 25year old (yo) women who attend at the first time cervical cancer screening. The trial also evaluated immune response after vaccination, reductions of cytological abnormalities and the impact of vaccination on screening activity. STUDY DESIGN: During 2010-2011, all 25 yo women who were invited to the Florence cervical cancer screening programme were also asked to participate in the trial. Enrolled women were randomized into study and control groups. Those in the study group were offered HPV vaccination after the usual Pap test. The cytology distribution and prevalence for any high risk (hr) HPV type were compared at the subsequent screening round in an intention-to-treat analysis. The impact of HPV vaccination was evaluated per protocol comparing vaccinated women with the control group. RESULTS: Our results showed a reduction in HPV prevalence at recall for any hr-HPV type but it was not statistically significant, being 17.1% vs 21.4%, p=0.20 in the study and control groups, respectively. If we restricted the analysis to vaccinated women, strong reductions of the HPV 16,18,31,33,45 and HPV 31,33,45 infections were observed, being 5.3% vs 12.8%, p<0.01 and 2.1% vs 6.5%, p=0.02, respectively. Significant reductions for any hr-HPV infection and for HPV 16 infection were also observed in women HPV 16/18 negative at enrolment, being 12% vs 21.4%, p<0.01 and 0.6% vs 6.7%, p-value<0.01, respectively. In women hr-HPV negative at enrolment no infections due to HPV 16 or HPV 18 were observed and there was a big reduction for any hr-HPV infection (7.1% vs 21.4% p<0.01). A strong antibody response was observed not only for HPV 16 & 18 but also for their related types. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that HPV vaccination at the age 25 is beneficial if it is offered to hr-HPV negative women. Our data will assist in developing a cost effectiveness model for choosing the best strategy to integrate screening and vaccination for the coming years. Clinical trial registration number is NCT02296255.

Estimating the cost-effectiveness profile of a universal vaccination programme with a nine-valent HPV vaccine in Austria.

BACKGROUND: HPV is a major cancer-causing factor in both sexes in the cervix, vulva, vagina, anus, penis, oropharynx as well as the causal factor in other diseases such as genital warts and recurrent respiratory papillomatis. In the context of the arrival of a nonavalent HPV vaccine (6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58), this analysis aims to estimate the public health impact and the incremental cost-effectiveness of a universal (girls and boys) vaccination program with a nonavalent HPV vaccine as compared to the current universal vaccination program with a quadrivalent HPV vaccine (6/11/16/18), in Austria. METHOD: A dynamic transmission model including a wide range of health and cost outcomes related to cervical, anal, vulvar, vaginal diseases and genital warts was calibrated to Austrian epidemiological data. The clinical impact due to the 5 new types was included for cervical and anal diseases outcomes only. In the base case, a two-dose schedule, lifelong vaccine type-specific protection and a vaccination coverage rate of 60% and 40% for girls and boys respectively for the 9-year old cohorts were assumed. A cost-effectiveness threshold of €30,000/QALY-gained was considered. RESULTS: Universal vaccination with the nonavalent vaccine was shown to reduce the incidence of HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58 -related cervical cancer by 92%, the related CIN2/3 cases by 96% and anal cancer by 83% and 76% respectively in females and males after 100 years, relative to 75%, 76%, 80% and 74% with the quadrivalent vaccine, respectively. Furthermore, the nonavalent vaccine was projected to prevent an additional 14,893 cases of CIN2/3 and 2544 cases of cervical cancer, over 100 years. Depending on the vaccine price, the strategy was shown to be from cost-saving to cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The present evaluation showed that vaccinating 60% of girls and 40% of boys aged 9 in Austria with a 9-valent vaccine will substantially reduce the incidence of cervical cancer, CIN and anal cancer compared to the existing strategy. The vaccination strategies performed with the 9-valent vaccine in the current study were all found to be cost-effective compared to the current quadrivalent vaccination strategy by considering a cost-effectiveness threshold of 30,000€/QALY gained.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus vaccination in South Africa accounting for human immunodeficiency virus prevalence.

BACKGROUND: This study aims at evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a 2-dose schedule human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme of HPV and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) naïve 12-year-old girls, in addition to cervical cancer (CC) screening alone, in South Africa. The study aims to account for both the impact of the vaccine among girls who are HIV-positive (HIV+) as well as HIV-negative (HIV-) population. METHODS: A previously published Markov cohort model was adapted to assess the impact and cost-effectiveness of a HPV vaccination programme in girls aged 12 years (N = 527 900) using the AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 vaccine from a public payer perspective. Two subpopulations were considered: HIV- and HIV+ women. Each population followed the HPV natural history with different transition probabilities. Model input data were obtained from the literature, local databases and Delphi panel. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 5 %. Extensive sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the evaluation. RESULTS: Implementation of the AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 vaccine in combination with current cytological screening in South African girls could prevent up to 8 869 CC cases and 5 436 CC deaths over the lifetime of a single cohort. Without discounting, this HPV vaccine is dominant over screening alone; with discounting, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is ZAR 81 978 (South African Rand) per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. HPV vaccination can be considered cost-effective based on World Health Organization (WHO) recommended threshold (3 x gross domestic product/capita = ZAR 200 293). In a scenario with a hypothetical targeted vaccination in a HIV+ subpopulation alone, the modelled outcomes suggest that HPV vaccination is still cost-effective, although the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio increases to ZAR 102 479. Results were sensitive to discount rate, vaccine efficacy, HIV incidence and mortality rates, and HPV-related disease transition probabilities. CONCLUSIONS: The AS04-adjuvanted HPV-16/18 vaccine can be considered cost-effective in a South African context although the cost-effectiveness is expected to be lower in the HIV+ subpopulation than in the overall female population. With improved access to HIV treatment, the HIV mortality and incidence rates are likely to be reduced, which could improve cost-effectiveness of the vaccination programme in South Africa.

Vaccination of boys or catch-up of girls above 11 years of age with the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine: where is the greatest benefit for cervical cancer prevention in Italy?

BACKGROUND: Since 2007, a Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme against cervical cancer (CC) is implemented in Italy in 11-year-old girls. The extension of HPV vaccination to young adult women, or to 11-year-old boys could further reduce the CC burden, in the latter case from indirect effect on HPV transmission. The objective of the study was to compare the potential CC cases prevention from HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccination of adding catch-up targeting 15- or 25-year-old girls to the addition of boys vaccination in Italy. The models assessing the impact of these alternative vaccination strategies are usually dynamic models requiring numerous input data. Simpler models could however provide some insight into this question, as reported in the current study. METHODS: A published cohort model adapted to the Italian setting was used to estimate the potential CC reduction following different HPV vaccination strategies with a HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine: vaccination of 11-year-old girls, female aged 15 or 25 years. The model assumed that the maximum benefit obtained from vaccinating boys equals the CC reduction that would result from immunisation of all non-vaccinated girls of the same age. Each cohort of 11-year-olds (either girls or boys) was assumed to include 281,000 individuals and a 70% vaccination coverage was applied. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying the vaccination coverage and the overlap in potential sexual contacts between vaccinated boys and girls of the same age-group. RESULTS: Under base case, compared with the screening-only scenario, HPV vaccination of 11-year-old girls, 15-year-old females, 25-year-old females or 11-year-old boys, would prevent 1,146, 1,082, 788 or 491 CC cases respectively. HPV vaccination of boys could result in more CC cases prevented than adding a female catch-up only in scenarios with low vaccination coverage in the primary target cohort and when combined with small overlap between vaccinated boys and girls of the same age cohort. CONCLUSIONS: For a fixed limited additional budget allowing the inclusion of a single catch-up cohort, the extension of HPV vaccination to girls or young women instead of boys was estimated to maximise the number of CC cases prevented.

Present status of human papillomavirus vaccine development and implementation.

Oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the cause of nearly all cervical cancers and a proportion of other anogenital and oropharyngeal cancers. A bivalent vaccine containing HPV 16 and 18 and a quadrivalent vaccine containing HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 antigens are in use in vaccination programmes around the world. In clinical trials, three vaccine doses provided 90-100% protection against cervical infection and pre-cancer related to HPV 16 and 18 in women aged 15-26 years who were not infected at vaccination. Partial cross-protection against other HPV types has been reported but its duration is unknown. The vaccines were also efficacious at the prevention of HPV 16 and 18 infections at other anatomical sites in both sexes. Immunobridging studies allowed licensing of the vaccines for use starting at age 9 years for both sexes. Two-dose schedules elicit high antibody concentrations, leading to the recommendation of two-dose schedules for girls aged 9-14 years. Pre-licensure and post-licensure studies have provided data supporting vaccine safety. In 2014, a nonavalent vaccine containing HPV 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 antigens was licensed by the US Food and Drug Administration. HPV vaccination was first introduced in high-income countries owing to vaccine cost, logistic challenges, and competing health priorities. Since 2011, vaccine prices have lowered, allowing the introduction of the vaccine in some middle-income countries. Funding of the vaccine by the GAVI Alliance in 2012 led to demonstration projects in some low-income countries. By 2014, more than 57 countries had included the HPV vaccine in their national health programmes. Data from several countries have shown the effect of vaccination on HPV infection and associated disease, and provided evidence of herd immunity. Expansion of programmes to countries with the highest burden of disease is beginning, but further efforts are needed to realise the potential of HPV vaccines.

Non-clinical safety assessment of single and repeated intramuscular administration of a human papillomavirus-16/18 vaccine in rabbits and rats.

The human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 vaccine (Cervarix®) is a prophylactic vaccine for the prevention of cervical cancer. The vaccine contains recombinant virus-like particles assembled from the L1 major capsid proteins of the cervical cancer-causing viral types HPV-16 and HPV-18, and Adjuvant System 04 (AS04), which contains the immunostimulant MPL and aluminium salt. To evaluate potential local and systemic toxic effects of the HPV-16/18 vaccine or AS04 alone, three repeated-dose studies were performed in rabbits and rats. One rabbit study also included a single-dose evaluation. In rabbits (~2.5 kg), the full human dose (HD) of the vaccine was evaluated (0.5 ml per injection site), and in rats (~250 g), 1/5 HD of vaccine was evaluated, corresponding to ≥ 12 times the dosage in humans relative to body weight. In both animal models, the treatment-related changes included a slight transient increase in the number of circulating neutrophils as well as a local inflammatory reaction at the injection site. These treatment-related changes were less pronounced after four doses of AS04 alone than after four doses of the HPV-16/18 vaccine. Additional treatment-related changes in the rat included lower albumin/globulin ratios and microscopic signs of inflammation in the popliteal lymph nodes. In both animal models, 13 weeks after the fourth dose, recovery was nearly complete, although at the injection site in some animals there were signs of discoloration, muscle-fibre regeneration and focal points of macrophage infiltration. Therefore, in these non-clinical models, the single and repeated dose administrations of the HPV-16/18 vaccine or AS04 alone were safe and well tolerated.

Immunogenicity assessment of HPV16/18 vaccine using the glutathione S-transferase L1 multiplex serology assay.

The glutathione S-transferase (GST)-L1 multiplex serology assay has favorable properties for use in clinical trials and epidemiologic studies, including low cost, high throughput capacity, and low serum volume requirement. Therefore, we evaluated the GST-L1 assay as a measure of HPV16/18 vaccine immunogenicity. Our study population included 65 women selected from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial who received the bivalent HPV16/18 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine at the recommended 0/1/6-month schedule. We tested replicate serum samples from months 0/1/12 (i.e., after 0/1/3 doses) by GST-L1 and 3 other commonly used serology assays, VLP-ELISA, SEAP-NA, and cLIA. We calculated the percentage of women seropositive by GST-L1 by time point and HPV type (14 HPV types), and compared GST-L1 to other assays using Spearman rank correlation coefficients. After 1 vaccine dose, seropositivity by GST-L1 was 40% each for HPV16 and HPV18, increasing to 100% and 98%, respectively, after 3 doses. Seropositivity after 3 doses ranged from 32% to 69% for HPV types 31/33/45, for which partial vaccine efficacy is reported, though increases also occurred for types with no evidence for cross-protection (e.g., HPV77). GST-L1 correlated best after 3 doses with VLP-ELISA (HPV16 and HPV18 each ρ = 0.72) and SEAP-NA (HPV16 ρ = 0.65, HPV18 ρ = 0.71) (all P < 0.001); correlation was lower with cLIA. The GST-L1 is suitable for evaluating HPV16/18 vaccine immunogenicity after 3 vaccine doses, although in contrast to other assays it may classify some samples as HPV16/18 seronegative. The assay's utility is limited for lower antibody levels such as after receipt of 1 dose.

Health economic analysis of human papillomavirus vaccines in women of Chile: perspective of the health care payer using a Markov model.

BACKGROUND: In Chile, significant reductions in cervical cancer incidence and mortality have been observed due to implementation of a well-organized screening program. However, it has been suggested that the inclusion of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for young adolescent women may be the best prospect to further reduce the burden of cervical cancer. This cost-effectiveness study comparing two available HPV vaccines in Chile was performed to support decision making on the implementation of universal HPV vaccination. METHODS: The present analysis used an existing static Markov model to assess the effect of screening and vaccination. This analysis includes the epidemiology of low-risk HPV types allowing for the comparison between the two vaccines (HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine and the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine), latest cross-protection data on HPV vaccines, treatment costs for cervical cancer, vaccine costs and 6% discounting per the health economic guideline for Chile. RESULTS: Projected incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs) for the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine was 116 United States (US) dollars per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained or 147 US dollars per life-years (LY) saved, while the projected ICUR/ICER for the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine was 541 US dollars per QALY gained or 726 US dollars per LY saved. Introduction of any HPV vaccine to the present cervical cancer prevention program of Chile is estimated to be highly cost-effective (below 1X gross domestic product [GDP] per capita, 14278 US dollars). In Chile, the addition of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine to the existing screening program dominated the addition of HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis results show that the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine is expected to be dominant and cost-saving in 69.3% and 77.6% of the replicates respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that the addition of any HPV vaccine to the current cervical screening program of Chile will be advantageous. However, this cost-effectiveness model shows that the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine dominated the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. Beyond the context of Chile, the data from this modelling exercise may support healthcare policy and decision-making pertaining to introduction of HPV vaccination in similar resource settings in the region.