Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Viruses ; 14(2)2022 01 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1667339

ABSTRACT

In 2014 and 2021, two nucleic-acid vaccine candidates named MAV E2 and VGX-3100 completed phase III clinical trials in Mexico and U.S., respectively, for patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-related, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL). These well-tolerated but still unlicensed vaccines encode distinct HPV antigens (E2 versus E6+E7) to elicit cell-mediated immune responses; their clinical efficacy, as measured by HSIL regression or cure, was modest when compared with placebo or surgery (conization), but both proved highly effective in clearing HPV infection, which should help further optimize strategies for enhancing vaccine immunogenicity, toward an ultimate goal of preventing malignancies in millions of patients who are living with persistent, oncogenic HPV infection but are not expected to benefit from current, prophylactic vaccines. The major roadblocks to a highly efficacious and practical product remain challenging and can be classified into five categories: (i) getting the vaccines into the right cells for efficient expression and presentation of HPV antigens (fusion proteins or epitopes); (ii) having adequate coverage of oncogenic HPV types, beyond the current focus on HPV-16 and -18; (iii) directing immune protection to various epithelial niches, especially anogenital mucosa and upper aerodigestive tract where HPV-transformed cells wreak havoc; (iv) establishing the time window and vaccination regimen, including dosage, interval and even combination therapy, for achieving maximum efficacy; and (v) validating therapeutic efficacy in patients with poor prognosis because of advanced, recurrent or non-resectable malignancies. Overall, the room for improvements is still large enough that continuing efforts for research and development will very likely extend into the next decade.


Subject(s)
Cancer Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia/therapy , Neoplasms/therapy , Papillomavirus Infections/therapy , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/therapy , Vaccines, DNA/therapeutic use , Animals , Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia/immunology , Clinical Trials as Topic , Female , Humans , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Neoplasms/immunology , Neoplasms/virology , Papillomavirus Infections/immunology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/immunology , Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions of the Cervix/therapy , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaccines, DNA/immunology , /therapeutic use
2.
Obstet Gynecol ; 135(5): 1070-1083, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455363

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy of adjuvant human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in preventing recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or greater after surgical excision. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (Cochrane, PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched for studies comparing surgical excision alone to surgical excision with adjuvant HPV vaccination for CIN 2 or greater. Studies published from January 1990 to January 2019 were included. METHODS: A total of 5,901 studies were reviewed. The primary outcomes evaluated included: recurrence of CIN 2 or greater, CIN 1 or greater, and HPV 16,18 associated CIN within 6-48 months. We used Covidence software to assist with screening, and meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Six studies met inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. In total 2,984 women were included; 1,360 (45.6%) received adjuvant HPV vaccination after surgical excision, and 1,624 (54.4%) received either placebo or surgical management alone for CIN 2 or greater. Recurrence of CIN 2 or greater occurred within 6-48 months in 115 women (3.9%) overall; however, recurrence was significantly lower for vaccinated women: 26 of 1,360 women (1.9%) vs 89 of 1,624 unvaccinated women (5.9%) (relative risk [RR] 0.36 95% CI 0.23-0.55). The risk of CIN 1 or greater was also significantly lower with adjuvant HPV vaccination, occurring in 86 of 1,360 vaccinated women (6.3%) vs 157 of 1,624 unvaccinated women (9.7%) (RR 0.67 95% CI 0.52-0.85). Thirty-five women developed recurrent CIN 2 or greater lesions specific to HPV 16,18; nine received adjuvant vaccination (0.9%) vs 26 who were unvaccinated (2.0%) (RR 0.41 95% CI 0.20-0.85). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant HPV vaccination in the setting of surgical excision for CIN 2 or greater is associated with a reduced risk of recurrent cervical dysplasia overall and a reduction in the risk of recurrent lesions caused by the most oncogenic strains (HPV 16,18). Human papillomavirus vaccination should therefore be considered for adjuvant treatment in patients undergoing surgical excision for CIN 2 or greater. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42019123786.


Subject(s)
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia/drug therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia/surgery , Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia/virology , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/virology , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Treatment Outcome , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/surgery , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Young Adult
3.
Cancer Prev Res (Phila) ; 14(10): 919-926, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1450634

ABSTRACT

The World Health Organization global call to eliminate cervical cancer encourages countries to consider introducing or improving cervical cancer screening programs. Brazil's Unified Health System (SUS) is among the world's largest public health systems offering free cytology testing, follow-up colposcopy, and treatment. Yet, health care networks across the country have unequal infrastructure, human resources, equipment, and supplies resulting in uneven program performance and large disparities in cervical cancer incidence and mortality. An effective screening program needs multiple strategies feasible for each community's reality, facilitating coverage and follow-up adherence. Prioritizing those at highest risk with tests that better stratify risk will limit inefficiencies, improving program impact across different resource settings. Highly sensitive human papillomavirus (HPV)-DNA testing performs better than cytology and, with self-collection closer to homes and workplaces, improves access, even in remote regions. Molecular triage strategies like HPV genotyping can identify from the same self-collected sample, those at highest risk requiring follow-up. If proven acceptable, affordable, cost-effective, and efficient in the Brazilian context, these strategies would increase coverage while removing the need for speculum exams for routine screening and reducing follow-up visits. SUS could implement a nationwide organized program that accommodates heterogenous settings across Brazil, informing a variety of screening programs worldwide.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Cytodiagnosis/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Brazil/epidemiology , DNA, Viral/analysis , DNA, Viral/genetics , Female , Humans , Papillomavirus Infections/genetics , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
4.
Viruses ; 13(6)2021 06 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1282638

ABSTRACT

Human papilloma virus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection worldwide causing a variety of benign and malignant conditions. A significant portion of the global population is infected with HPV, with the virus attributed to causing up to 5% of cancers worldwide. Bivalent, quadrivalent, and nine-valent vaccinations exist to aid in the prevention of these diseases and have been proven to be effective at preventing both benign and malignant disease. While vaccination is readily accessible in more developed countries, barriers exist to worldwide distribution and acceptance of vaccination. Vaccination and screening of HPV infection when used in combination are proven and predicted to decrease HPV related pathology. Improvements in vaccination formulations, for treatment as well as prevention, are actively being sought from a variety of mechanisms. Despite these advancements, and the data supporting their efficacy, there has been substantial delay in obtaining adequate vaccination coverage. In reviewing these challenges and looking forward to new vaccine development-especially within the current pandemic-it is clear from the challenges of HPV we require methods to more effectively encourage vaccination, ways to dispel vaccination myths as they occur, and implement better processes for vaccine distribution globally.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus/immunology , Papillomaviridae/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , Vaccination , Female , Humans , Mass Screening , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
5.
JAMA Oncol ; 7(6): 885-894, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274648

ABSTRACT

Importance: In 2018, only half of US women obtained all evidence-based cancer screenings. This proportion may have declined during the COVID-19 pandemic because of social distancing, high-risk factors, and fear. Objective: To evaluate optimal screening strategies in women who obtain some, but not all, US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended cancer screenings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This modeling study was conducted from January 31, 2017, to July 20, 2020, and used 4 validated mathematical models from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network using data from 20 million simulated women born in 1965 in the US. Interventions: Forty-five screening strategies were modeled that combined breast, cervical, colorectal, and/or lung cancer (LC) screenings; restricted to 1, 2, 3 or 4 screenings per year; or all eligible screenings once every 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Modeled life-years gained from restricted cancer screenings as a fraction of those attainable from full compliance with USPSTF recommendations (maximum benefits). Results were stratified by LC screening eligibility (LC-eligible/ineligible). We repeated the analysis with 2018 adherence rates, evaluating the increase in adherence required for restricted screenings to have the same population benefit as USPSTF recommendations. Results: This modeling study of 20 million simulated US women found that it was possible to reduce screening intensity to 1 carefully chosen test per year in women who were ineligible for LC screening and 2 tests per year in eligible women while maintaining 94% or more of the maximum benefits. Highly ranked strategies screened for various cancers, but less often than recommended by the USPSTF. For example, among LC-ineligible women who obtained just 1 screening per year, the optimal strategy frequently delayed breast and cervical cancer screenings by 1 year and skipped 3 mammograms entirely. Among LC-eligible women, LC screening was essential; strategies omitting it provided 25% or less of the maximum benefits. The top-ranked strategy restricted to 2 screenings per year was annual LC screening and alternating fecal immunochemical test with mammography (skipping mammograms when due for cervical cancer screening, 97% of maximum benefits). If adherence in a population of LC-eligible women obtaining 2 screenings per year were to increase by 1% to 2% (depending on the screening test), this model suggests that it would achieve the same benefit as USPSTF recommendations at 2018 adherence rates. Conclusions and Relevance: This modeling study of 45 cancer screening strategies suggests that women who are noncompliant with cancer screening guidelines may be able to reduce USPSTF-recommended screening intensity with minimal reduction in overall benefits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Early Detection of Cancer , Models, Theoretical , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/virology , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/virology , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/virology , Mammography , Patient Compliance , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
6.
Cytopathology ; 32(6): 766-770, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1242155

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Currently, it is thought that uterine cervix mucosal samples present a low risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. So far, there is no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 detection in Papanicolaou (Pap) smears. Nevertheless, clinicians could be exposed unaware to the coronavirus while performing and handling a Pap smear. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in cervical liquid-based cytology (LBC) samples in women who tested positive for a nasopharyngeal COVID-19 PCR test. METHODS: From our laboratory database, we identified patients with data on a cervical cancer screening LBC sample paired with a positive nasopharyngeal COVID-19 PCR test. Relevant LBC samples taken within an incubation period of 14 days and post-onset RNA shedding interval of 25 days were subsequently tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA using RT-PCR tests. RESULTS: The study group consisted of 102 women. Of those, 23 LBC samples were tested. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in one LBC sample from a 26-year-old asymptomatic woman taken six days before reporting headaches and knee arthralgia with a positive nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA in cervical LBC samples at an early asymptomatic stage of COVID-19. In general, this finding is infrequent in asymptomatic women who tested SARS-CoV-2 positive within an incubation of 14 days and a post-onset RNA shedding period of 25 days. We fully support the current thinking that cervical LBC samples from asymptomatic women pose a low risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure and can be handled in the frame of good microbiological practice and procedures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19 , Papanicolaou Test , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaginal Smears , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/genetics , COVID-19/metabolism , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/genetics , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/metabolism , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
7.
JAMA Oncol ; 7(6): 885-894, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1206734

ABSTRACT

Importance: In 2018, only half of US women obtained all evidence-based cancer screenings. This proportion may have declined during the COVID-19 pandemic because of social distancing, high-risk factors, and fear. Objective: To evaluate optimal screening strategies in women who obtain some, but not all, US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended cancer screenings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This modeling study was conducted from January 31, 2017, to July 20, 2020, and used 4 validated mathematical models from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network using data from 20 million simulated women born in 1965 in the US. Interventions: Forty-five screening strategies were modeled that combined breast, cervical, colorectal, and/or lung cancer (LC) screenings; restricted to 1, 2, 3 or 4 screenings per year; or all eligible screenings once every 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: Modeled life-years gained from restricted cancer screenings as a fraction of those attainable from full compliance with USPSTF recommendations (maximum benefits). Results were stratified by LC screening eligibility (LC-eligible/ineligible). We repeated the analysis with 2018 adherence rates, evaluating the increase in adherence required for restricted screenings to have the same population benefit as USPSTF recommendations. Results: This modeling study of 20 million simulated US women found that it was possible to reduce screening intensity to 1 carefully chosen test per year in women who were ineligible for LC screening and 2 tests per year in eligible women while maintaining 94% or more of the maximum benefits. Highly ranked strategies screened for various cancers, but less often than recommended by the USPSTF. For example, among LC-ineligible women who obtained just 1 screening per year, the optimal strategy frequently delayed breast and cervical cancer screenings by 1 year and skipped 3 mammograms entirely. Among LC-eligible women, LC screening was essential; strategies omitting it provided 25% or less of the maximum benefits. The top-ranked strategy restricted to 2 screenings per year was annual LC screening and alternating fecal immunochemical test with mammography (skipping mammograms when due for cervical cancer screening, 97% of maximum benefits). If adherence in a population of LC-eligible women obtaining 2 screenings per year were to increase by 1% to 2% (depending on the screening test), this model suggests that it would achieve the same benefit as USPSTF recommendations at 2018 adherence rates. Conclusions and Relevance: This modeling study of 45 cancer screening strategies suggests that women who are noncompliant with cancer screening guidelines may be able to reduce USPSTF-recommended screening intensity with minimal reduction in overall benefits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Early Detection of Cancer , Models, Theoretical , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/virology , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/virology , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/virology , Mammography , Patient Compliance , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology
8.
JNCI Cancer Spectr ; 5(2): pkab011, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1123321

ABSTRACT

The current global novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic threatens to derail the uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in low- and lower-middle income countries with major disruptions to routine immunization and the introduction of new vaccines delayed. This has a major impact on the World Health Organization cervical cancer elimination strategy, where it is dependent on HPV vaccination as well as cervical cancer screening and treatment. We discuss current opportunities and barriers to achieve high uptake of HPV vaccination in low- and lower-middle income countries as well as the impact of COVID-19. Implementation of 4 key recommendations for HPV vaccination in low- and lower-middle income countries is needed: increased global financial investment; improved vaccine supply and accelerated use of a single-dose schedule; education and social marketing; and adoption of universal school-based delivery. With the commitment of the global health community, the adoption of these strategies would underpin the effective elimination of cervical cancer.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus/immunology , COVID-19/complications , Papillomavirus Infections/immunology , Papillomavirus Vaccines/immunology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/immunology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Alphapapillomavirus/physiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Developing Countries , Female , Humans , Immunization Programs/economics , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/administration & dosage , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaccination/methods
9.
Br J Cancer ; 124(8): 1361-1365, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1072147

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cervical cancer screening services. Assuming increases to screening capacity are unrealistic, we propose two recovery strategies: one extends the screening interval by 6 months for all and the other extends the interval by 36/60 months, but only for women who have already missed being screened. METHODS: Using routine statistics from England we estimate the number of women affected by delays to screening. We used published research to estimate the proportion of screening age women with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and progression rates to cancer. Under two recovery scenarios, we estimate the impact of COVID-19 on cervical cancer over one screening cycle (3 years at ages 25-49 and 5 years at ages 50-64 years). The duration of disruption in both scenarios is 6 months. In the first scenario, 10.7 million women have their screening interval extended by 6 months. In the second, 1.5 million women (those due to be screened during the disruption) miss one screening cycle, but most women have no delay. RESULTS: Both scenarios result in similar numbers of excess cervical cancers: 630 vs. 632 (both 4.3 per 100,000 women in the population). However, the scenario in which some women miss one screening cycle creates inequalities-they would have much higher rates of excess cancer: 41.5 per 100,000 delayed for screened women compared to those with a 6-month delay (5.9 per 100,000). CONCLUSION: To ensure equity for those affected by COVID-19 related screening delays additional screening capacity will need to be paired with prioritising the screening of overdue women.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Colposcopy/methods , England/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Papillomaviridae/pathogenicity , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/complications , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaginal Smears/methods
11.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 17(3): 836-837, 2021 03 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-786983

ABSTRACT

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been growing, including in Japan where it has been estimated that as many as 3.1% of patients positive for new CoV strain SARS-CoV-2 might die of COVID-19-related respiratory failure. Meanwhile, human papillomavirus (HPV) is spreading in Japan. The fatality rate for HPV-associated cancers after infection with HPV is as much as that for COVID-19 in Japan, although the time to disease is much longer for HPV. Among advanced countries, the cervical cancer screening rate in Japanese females is very low. The Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) suspended its official recommendation for HPV vaccination in June 2013 due to alleged adverse post-vaccination events in several young girls, such as chronic pain and motor impairment, which were repeatedly reported in the media. Subsequently, the rate for vaccinating girls plummeted from approximately 70% to the current rate of 1% or less. Women should accept HPV vaccination for the eventual prevention of cervical cancer with the same passion they are for COVID-19 testing.


Subject(s)
Alphapapillomavirus/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Female , Humans , Japan , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/immunology , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/virology , Vaccination/methods
13.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 30(8): 1097-1100, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-505825
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL