Search

The article discusses the role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in cervical cancer prevention. It mentions about prophylactic vaccines that generate HPV specific antibodies which bind to the virus preventing it from infecting cervical epithelial cells. It states about strategies for exploiting HPV testing in cervical screening such as treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and informs that cervical cytology is labour intensive.

The article presents arguments in favor of human papillomavirus (HPV) primary cervical screening. Topics discussed include some large randomised trials which showed that HPV testing is more sensitive than cytology for detecting underlying high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), and the fact that some cases of CIN stage 3 are caused by non-vaccine types.

Abstract: This chapter reviews the contribution of cervical cytology, what makes it successful, the management of screen positives and how technological advances may affect its use in the future. Cervical screening has saved hundreds of thousands of lives but has not been available to women in the poorest countries. In countries where wide coverage has been achieved and quality assurance is in place, incidence and death rates have fallen by over 50% even though cervical cytology is logistically complex. The management of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is very effective, but low-grade cytological abnormalities require care to avoid over-treatment. The increasing rate of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and the prospect of prophylactic vaccination will change the way cervical cytology is used, possibly giving way to HPV testing as the primary test in secondary prevention. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: To report detailed age‐specific outcomes from the first round of an English pilot studying the implementation of high‐risk human papillomavirus (HR‐HPV) testing in primary cervical screening. Design: Observational study with screening in 2013–2016, followed by two early recalls and/or colposcopy until the end of 2019. Setting: Six NHS laboratory sites. Population: A total of 1 341 584 women undergoing screening with HR‐HPV testing or liquid‐based cytology (LBC). Methods: Early recall tests and colposcopies were recommended, depending on the nature of the screening‐detected abnormality. Main outcome measures: We reported standard screening process indicators, e.g. proportions with an abnormality, including high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2+) or cancer, and the positive predictive value (PPV) of colposcopy for CIN2+, by screening test and age group. Results: Among unvaccinated women screened with HR‐HPV testing at age 24–29 years, 26.9% had a positive test and 10.4% were directly referred to colposcopy following cytology triage, with a PPV for CIN2+ of 47%. At 50–64 years of age, these proportions were much lower: 5.3%, 1.2% and 27%, respectively. The proportions of women testing positive for HR‐HPV without cytological abnormalities, whose early recall HR‐HPV tests returned negative results, were similar across the age spans: 54% at 24–29 years and 55% at 50–64 years. Two‐thirds of infections at any age were linked to non‐16/18 genotypes. Among women with CIN2, CIN3 or cervical cancer, however, the proportion of non‐16/18 infections increased with age. As expected, the detection of abnormalities was lower following screening with LBC. Conclusions: These data provide a reliable reference for future epidemiological studies, including those concerning the effectiveness of HPV vaccination. Data from the English pilot study provide a comprehensive overview of abnormalities detected through HPV screening. Data from the English pilot study provide a comprehensive overview of abnormalities detected through HPV screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: With the introduction of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination an evidence base on effective adolescent educational interventions is urgently required. We undertook formative research to develop and evaluate a film on HPV and cervical cancer prevention for school children who will be offered HPV vaccination in the UK. The main outcome measures were the number of children allowed by parents to view the film and children''s knowledge. Our results indicated that the film''s four key messages were acceptable to parents and largely understood by adolescents but these messages will need reinforcing if the full potential of a prophylactic vaccine is to be realised. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The first vaccine to prevent human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer has been licensed, and in future, vaccination may be routinely offered to 10-14 year old girls. HPV is a sexually transmitted virus and some parents may refuse consent for vaccination. Under-16s in the UK have a right to confidential sexual health care without parental consent. We investigated parents' views on making available HPV vaccination to adolescent minors at sexual health clinics without parental consent. Methods: This was a semi-qualitative analysis of views of parents of 11-12 year old school children collected as part of a population-based survey of parental attitudes to HPV vaccination in Manchester. Parents were firstly asked if they agreed that a well-informed child should be able to request vaccination at a sexual health clinic without parental consent, and secondly, to provide a reason for this answer. Ethical perspectives on adolescent autonomy provided the framework for descriptive analysis. Results: 307 parents answered the question, and of these, 244 (80%) explained their views. Parents with views consistent with support for adolescent autonomy (n = 99) wanted to encourage responsible behaviour, protect children from ill-informed or bigoted parents, and respected confidentiality and individual rights. In contrast, 97 parents insisted on being involved in decision-making. They emphasised adult responsibility for a child's health and guidance, erosion of parental rights, and respect for cultural and moral values. Other parents (n = 48) wanted clearer legal definitions governing parental rights and responsibilities or hoped for joint decision-making. Parents resistant to adolescent autonomy would be less likely to consent to future HPV vaccination, (67%) than parents supporting this principle (89%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: In the UK, the principle of adolescent autonomy is recognised and logically should include the right to HPV vaccination, but this may concern parents who would otherwise approve vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cervical cancer is the fourth most common malignancy diagnosed in women worldwide. Nearly all cases of cervical cancer result from infection with the human papillomavirus, and the prevention of cervical cancer includes screening and vaccination. Primary treatment options for patients with cervical cancer may include surgery or a concurrent chemoradiotherapy regimen consisting of cisplatin-based chemotherapy with external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Cervical cancer causes more than one quarter of a million deaths per year as a result of grossly deficient treatments in many developing countries. This warrants a concerted global effort to counter the shocking loss of life and suffering that largely goes unreported. This article provides a review of the biology, prevention, and treatment of cervical cancer, and discusses the global cervical cancer crisis and efforts to improve the prevention and treatment of the disease in underdeveloped countries. Cancer 2017;123:2404-12. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although the risk of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is greatest in young women, women older than 25 years remain at risk. We present data from the VIVIANE study of the HPV 16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine in adult women after 7 years of follow-up.Methods: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, healthy women older than 25 years were enrolled (age stratified: 26-35 years, 36-45 years, and ≥46 years). Up to 15% in each age stratum had a history of HPV infection or disease. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive HPV 16/18 vaccine or aluminium hydroxide control, with an internet-based system. The primary endpoint was vaccine efficacy against 6-month persistent infection or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or greater (CIN1+) associated with HPV 16/18. We did analyses in the according-to-protocol cohort for efficacy and total vaccinated cohort. Data for the combined primary endpoint in the according-to-protocol cohort for efficacy were considered significant when the lower limit of the 96·2% CI around the point estimate was greater than 30%. For all other endpoints and cohorts, data were considered significant when the lower limit of the 96·2% CI was greater than 0%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00294047.Findings: The first participant was enrolled on Feb 16, 2006, and the last study visit took place on Jan 29, 2014. 4407 women were in the according-to-protocol cohort for efficacy (n=2209 vaccine, n=2198 control) and 5747 women in the total vaccinated cohort (n=2877 vaccine, n=2870 control). At month 84, in women seronegative for the corresponding HPV type in the according-to-protocol cohort for efficacy, vaccine efficacy against 6-month persistent infection or CIN1+ associated with HPV 16/18 was significant in all age groups combined (90·5%, 96·2% CI 78·6-96·5). Vaccine efficacy against HPV 16/18-related cytological abnormalities (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) and CIN1+ was also significant. We also noted significant cross-protective efficacy against 6-month persistent infection with HPV 31 (65·8%, 96·2% CI 24·9-85·8) and HPV 45 (70·7%, 96·2% CI 34·2-88·4). In the total vaccinated cohort, vaccine efficacy against CIN1+ irrespective of HPV was significant (22·9%, 96·2% CI 4·8-37·7). Serious adverse events related to vaccination occurred in five (0·2%) of 2877 women in the vaccine group and eight (0·3%) of 2870 women in the control group.Interpretation: In women older than 25 years, the HPV 16/18 vaccine continues to protect against infections, cytological abnormalities, and lesions associated with HPV 16/18 and CIN1+ irrespective of HPV type, and infection with non-vaccine types HPV 31 and HPV 45 over 7 years of follow-up.Funding: GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]