Prevalence of HPV infection among Thai schoolgirls in the north-eastern provinces in 2018: implications for HPV immunization policy.

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of high-risk (HR) and vaccine-type human papillomavirus (HPV) infection among Thai schoolgirls who were not included in the national HPV immunization program. Methods: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted among grade 10 (15-16 years old) and grade 12 (17-18 years old) schoolgirls in two provinces of Thailand. Urine samples were collected using the Colli-PeeⓇ device from November 2018 to February 2019. The samples were initially tested using CobasⓇ 4800. Subsequently, all Cobas-positive samples and 1:1 matched Cobas-negative samples were tested by AnyplexⓇ assay. Prevalences of any HPV, any HR HPV, vaccine-type HPV, and individual HR HPV types were estimated by school grade. Results: Prevalences of any HPV and any HR HPV were 11.6% and 8.6% for grade 10, and 18.5% and 12.4% for grade 12 schoolgirls, respectively. Prevalences of bivalent vaccine-type HPV infection in grades 10 and 12 were 3.4% and 4.5%, respectively. Prevalences of quadrivalent and nonavalent vaccine-type HPV infections were 4.0%/6.6% and 6.4%/10.4% in grades 10 and 12, respectively. HPV16 was the most common type detected, followed by HPV58, 51, and 52. Circulating HR HPV types were similar between the school grades. Conclusion: A substantial burden of HR HPV infections was found among unvaccinated high school girls in Thailand.

A community intervention effectiveness study of single dose or two doses of bivalent HPV vaccine (CERVARIX®) in female school students in Thailand.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a common infection principally spread through sexual activity. Most HPV infections are asymptomatic and resolve spontaneously. However, persistent infection may progress to cervical cancer. Highly efficacious HPV vaccines have been available since 2006, yet uptake into national programs has been slow in part due to cost. WHO guidelines call for a two-dose (0,6 month) schedule for girls 9-14 years of age. Post-hoc analyses of randomized trials have found high vaccine effectiveness following a single dose of vaccine. In order to provide additional data on the potential impact of single dose HPV vaccination in a real-world setting, we are conducting an effectiveness study among Thai schoolgirls. This is an observational study of a single dose (SD) or two doses (2D) of the bivalent HPV vaccine CERVARIX® (GlaxoSmithKline plc.) administered in a school-based program to 8-9,000 Grade 8 female students in two provinces of Thailand beginning in 2018; one province is assigned the SD, and the other the standard 2D regimen. The reduction in HPV vaccine-type prevalence will be assessed in each province two and four years after vaccination by comparing HPV prevalence in urine samples obtained through cross-sectional surveys of the immunized grade cohort as they age and compared to a historical "baseline" HPV prevalence of same age students.

Public health policies and health-care workers' response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Thailand.

Since January 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a far-reaching impact on global morbidity and mortality. The effects of varying degrees of implementation of public health and social measures between countries is evident in terms of widely differing disease burdens and levels of disruption to public health systems. Despite Thailand being the first country outside China to report a positive case of COVID-19, the subsequent number of cases and deaths has been much lower than in many other countries. As of 7 January 2021, the number of confirmed COVID-19-positive cases in Thailand was 9636 (138 per million population) and the number of deaths was 67 (1 per million population). We describe the nature of the health workforce and function that facilitated the capacity to respond to this pandemic. We also describe the public health policies (laboratory testing, test-and-trace system and mandatory 14-day quarantine of cases) and social interventions (daily briefings, restriction of mobility and social gatherings, and wearing of face masks) that allowed the virus to be successfully contained. To enhance the capacity of health-care workers to respond to the pandemic, the government (i) mobilized staff to meet the required surge capacity; (ii) developed and implemented policies to protect occupational safety; and (iii) initiated packages to support morale and well-being. The results of the policies that we describe are evident in the data: of the 66 countries with more than 100 COVID-19-positive cases in health-care workers as at 8 May 2020, Thailand ranked 65th.

Depuis janvier 2020, la pandémie de maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19) a eu un impact considérable sur la morbidité et la mortalité à l'échelle globale. Les degrés de mise en œuvre des mesures sociales et sanitaires, qui varient d'un pays à l'autre, ont des conséquences évidentes, notamment sur les différences de charge que représente la maladie et sur l'ampleur des perturbations touchant les systèmes de santé publique. Même si la Thaïlande est, après la Chine, la première nation à avoir signalé un cas positif de COVID-19, le nombre de cas et de décès qui ont suivi a été nettement moins élevé que dans de nombreux autres pays. Au 7 janvier 2021, la Thaïlande comptait 9636 cas positifs confirmés de COVID-19 (138 par million d'habitants) et 67 décès (1,0 par million d'habitants). Dans le présent document, nous décrivons la nature des professionnels de santé et des fonctions qui ont renforcé les capacités de réaction face à cette pandémie. Nous détaillons également les politiques de santé publique (tests en laboratoire, système de dépistage et de suivi, quarantaine obligatoire de 14 jours pour les cas détectés) et les interventions sociales (séances d'information quotidiennes, restriction des déplacements et des rassemblements, port du masque) qui ont permis de contenir le virus avec succès. Afin d'aider les soignants à lutter contre la pandémie, le gouvernement (i) a mobilisé du personnel pour fournir les capacités d'intervention requises; (ii) a développé et appliqué des mesures de protection pour garantir la sécurité au travail; et enfin, (iii) a proposé des programmes de soutien au moral et au bien-être. Les politiques que nous évoquons se traduisent par des résultats sans équivoque: sur les 66 pays dépassant les 100 cas positifs de COVID-19 chez les professionnels de santé au 8 mai 2020, la Thaïlande se classait à la 65e place.

Desde enero de 2020, la pandemia de la enfermedad por coronavirus (COVID-19) ha tenido un impacto de gran alcance en la morbilidad y la mortalidad mundial. Los efectos de los diferentes grados de aplicación de las medidas sociales y de salud pública entre los países son evidentes en términos de cargas virales muy diferentes y niveles de perturbación de los sistemas de salud pública. A pesar de que Tailandia fue el primer país fuera de China en notificar un caso positivo de COVID-19, el número posterior de casos y muertes ha sido mucho menor que en muchos otros países. Hasta el 7 de enero de 2021, el número de casos positivos confirmados de COVID-19 en Tailandia era de 9.636 (138 por millón de población) y el número de muertes era de 67 (1,0 por millón de población). Describimos la naturaleza del personal sanitario y la función que facilitó la capacidad de respuesta a esta pandemia. También describimos las políticas de salud pública (pruebas de laboratorio, sistema de prueba y rastreo y cuarentena obligatoria de 14 días), así como las intervenciones sociales (sesiones informativas diarias, restricción de la movilidad y de las reuniones sociales, uso de mascarillas, etc.) que permitieron contener el virus con éxito. Para mejorar la capacidad de los trabajadores sanitarios para responder a la pandemia, el gobierno (i) movilizó al personal para satisfacer la capacidad de respuesta requerida; (ii) desarrolló y aplicó políticas para proteger la seguridad laboral; y (iii) puso en marcha paquetes para apoyar la moral y el bienestar de la población. Los resultados de las políticas que describimos son evidentes en los datos: de los 66 países con más de 100 casos positivos de COVID-19 en trabajadores sanitarios a 8 de mayo de 2020, Tailandia ocupaba el puesto 65.

Case-Control Study of Use of Personal Protective Measures and Risk for SARS-CoV 2 Infection, Thailand.

We evaluated effectiveness of personal protective measures against severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Our case-control study included 211 cases of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and 839 controls in Thailand. Cases were defined as asymptomatic contacts of COVID-19 patients who later tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; controls were asymptomatic contacts who never tested positive. Wearing masks all the time during contact was independently associated with lower risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with not wearing masks; wearing a mask sometimes during contact did not lower infection risk. We found the type of mask worn was not independently associated with infection and that contacts who always wore masks were more likely to practice social distancing. Maintaining >1 m distance from a person with COVID-19, having close contact for <15 minutes, and frequent handwashing were independently associated with lower risk for infection. Our findings support consistent wearing of masks, handwashing, and social distancing to protect against COVID-19.

Molecular evolution of the HIV-1 Thai epidemic between the time of RV144 immunogen selection to the execution of the vaccine efficacy trial.

The RV144 HIV-1 vaccine trial (Thailand, 2003 to 2009), using immunogens genetically matched to the regional epidemic, demonstrated the first evidence of efficacy for an HIV-1 vaccine. Here we studied the molecular evolution of the HIV-1 epidemic from the time of immunogen selection to the execution of the efficacy trial. We studied HIV-1 genetic diversity among 390 volunteers who were deferred from enrollment in RV144 due to preexisting HIV-1 infection using a multiregion hybridization assay, full-genome sequencing, and phylogenetic analyses. The subtype distribution was 91.7% CRF01_AE, 3.5% subtype B, 4.3% B/CRF01_AE recombinants, and 0.5% dual infections. CRF01_AE strains were 31% more diverse than the ones from the 1990s Thai epidemic. Sixty-nine percent of subtype B strains clustered with the cosmopolitan Western B strains. Ninety-three percent of B/CRF01_AE recombinants were unique; recombination breakpoint analysis showed that these strains were highly embedded within the larger network that integrates recombinants from East/Southeast Asia. Compared to Thai sequences from the early 1990s, the distance to the RV144 immunogens increased 52% to 68% for CRF01_AE Env immunogens and 12% to 29% for subtype B immunogens. Forty-three percent to 48% of CRF01_AE sequences differed from the sequence of the vaccine insert in Env variable region 2 positions 169 and 181, which were implicated in vaccine sieve effects in RV144. In conclusion, compared to the molecular picture at the early stages of vaccine development, our results show an overall increase in the genetic complexity of viruses in the Thai epidemic and in the distance to vaccine immunogens, which should be considered at the time of the analysis of the trial results.

Extended evaluation of the virologic, immunologic, and clinical course of volunteers who acquired HIV-1 infection in a phase III vaccine trial of ALVAC-HIV and AIDSVAX B/E.

BACKGROUND: The Thai Phase III Trial of ALVAC-HIV and AIDSVAX B/E showed an estimated vaccine efficacy (VE) of 31% to prevent acquisition of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Here we evaluated the effect of vaccination on disease progression after infection. METHODS: CD4(+) T-cell counts and HIV viral load (VL) were measured serially. The primary analysis evaluated vaccine efficacy (VEP) as the percent reduction (vaccine vs placebo) in cumulative probability of a primary composite endpoint of clinical and CD4(+) count components at prespecified time points after infection. Secondary analyses of biomarker-based endpoints were assessed using marginal mean and linear mixed models. RESULTS: There were 61 endpoints in the modified intent-to-treat cohort (mITT; n = 114). There was no evidence for efficacy at 30, 42, 54, and 60 months in the mITT and per protocol (n = 90) cohorts. Estimated VEP (mITT) was15.8% (-21.9, 41.8) at 60 months postinfection. There was weak evidence of lower VL and higher CD4(+) count at 60 and 66 months in the vaccine group. Lower mucosal VL was observed among vaccine recipients, primarily in semen (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination did not affect the clinical course of HIV disease after infection. A potential vaccine effect on the genital mucosa warrants further study.

Is a HIV vaccine a viable option and at what price? An economic evaluation of adding HIV vaccination into existing prevention programs in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to determine the maximum price at which HIV vaccination is cost-effective in the Thai healthcare setting. It also aims to identify the relative importance of vaccine characteristics and risk behavior changes among vaccine recipients to determine how they affect this cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A semi-Markov model was developed to estimate the costs and health outcomes of HIV prevention programs combined with HIV vaccination in comparison to the existing HIV prevention programs without vaccination. The estimation was based on a lifetime horizon period (99 years) and used the government perspective. The analysis focused on both the general population and specific high-risk population groups. The maximum price of cost-effective vaccination was defined by using threshold analysis; one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The study employed an expected value of perfect information (EVPI) analysis to determine the relative importance of parameters and to prioritize future studies. RESULTS: The most expensive HIV vaccination which is cost-effective when given to the general population was 12,000 Thai baht (US$1 = 34 Thai baht in 2009). This vaccination came with 70% vaccine efficacy and lifetime protection as long as risk behavior was unchanged post-vaccination. The vaccine would be considered cost-ineffective at any price if it demonstrated low efficacy (30%) and if post-vaccination risk behavior increased by 10% or more, especially among the high-risk population groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were the most sensitive to change in post-vaccination risk behavior, followed by vaccine efficacy and duration of protection. The EVPI indicated the need to quantify vaccine efficacy, changed post-vaccination risk behavior, and the costs of vaccination programs. CONCLUSIONS: The approach used in this study differentiated it from other economic evaluations and can be applied for the economic evaluation of other health interventions not available in healthcare systems. This study is important not only for researchers conducting future HIV vaccine research but also for policy decision makers who, in the future, will consider vaccine adoption.

Vaccination with ALVAC and AIDSVAX to prevent HIV-1 infection in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: The development of a safe and effective vaccine against the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) is critical to pandemic control. METHODS: In a community-based, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy trial, we evaluated four priming injections of a recombinant canarypox vector vaccine (ALVAC-HIV [vCP1521]) plus two booster injections of a recombinant glycoprotein 120 subunit vaccine (AIDSVAX B/E). The vaccine and placebo injections were administered to 16,402 healthy men and women between the ages of 18 and 30 years in Rayong and Chon Buri provinces in Thailand. The volunteers, primarily at heterosexual risk for HIV infection, were monitored for the coprimary end points: HIV-1 infection and early HIV-1 viremia, at the end of the 6-month vaccination series and every 6 months thereafter for 3 years. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis involving 16,402 subjects, there was a trend toward the prevention of HIV-1 infection among the vaccine recipients, with a vaccine efficacy of 26.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], -4.0 to 47.9; P=0.08). In the per-protocol analysis involving 12,542 subjects, the vaccine efficacy was 26.2% (95% CI, -13.3 to 51.9; P=0.16). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis involving 16,395 subjects (with the exclusion of 7 subjects who were found to have had HIV-1 infection at baseline), the vaccine efficacy was 31.2% (95% CI, 1.1 to 52.1; P=0.04). Vaccination did not affect the degree of viremia or the CD4+ T-cell count in subjects in whom HIV-1 infection was subsequently diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: This ALVAC-HIV and AIDSVAX B/E vaccine regimen may reduce the risk of HIV infection in a community-based population with largely heterosexual risk. Vaccination did not affect the viral load or CD4+ count in subjects with HIV infection. Although the results show only a modest benefit, they offer insight for future research. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00223080.)