OBJECTIVE:To examine the effect of the bivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine on miscarriage. DESIGN:Observational long term follow-up of a randomized, double blinded trial combined with an independent unvaccinated population based cohort. SETTING:Single center study in Costa Rica. PARTICIPANTS:7466 women in the trial and 2836 women in the unvaccinated cohort enrolled at the end of the randomized trial and in parallel with the observational trial component. INTERVENTION:Women in the trial were assigned to receive three doses of bivalent HPV vaccine (n=3727) or the control hepatitis A vaccine (n=3739). Crossover bivalent HPV vaccination occurred in the hepatitis A vaccine arm at the end of the trial. Women in the unvaccinated cohort received (n=2836) no vaccination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:Risk of miscarriage, defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as fetal loss within 20 weeks of gestation, in pregnancies exposed to bivalent HPV vaccination in less than 90 days and any time from vaccination compared with pregnancies exposed to hepatitis A vaccine and pregnancies in the unvaccinated cohort. RESULTS:Of 3394 pregnancies conceived at any time since bivalent HPV vaccination, 381 pregnancies were conceived less than 90 days from vaccination. Unexposed pregnancies comprised 2507 pregnancies conceived after hepatitis A vaccination and 720 conceived in the unvaccinated cohort. Miscarriages occurred in 451 (13.3%) of all exposed pregnancies, in 50 (13.1%) of the pregnancies conceived less than 90 days from bivalent HPV vaccination, and in 414 (12.8%) of the unexposed pregnancies, of which 316 (12.6%) were in the hepatitis A vaccine group and 98 (13.6%) in the unvaccinated cohort. The relative risk of miscarriage for pregnancies conceived less than 90 days from vaccination compared with all unexposed pregnancies was 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.34, one sided P=0.436) in unadjusted analyses. Results were similar after adjusting for age at vaccination (relative risk 1.15, one sided P=0.17), age at conception (1.03, P=0.422), and calendar year (1.06, P=0.358), and in stratified analyses. Among pregnancies conceived at any time from bivalent HPV vaccination, exposure was not associated with an increased risk of miscarriage overall or in subgroups, except for miscarriages at weeks 13-20 of gestation (relative risk 1.35, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.77, one sided P=0.017). CONCLUSIONS:There is no evidence that bivalent HPV vaccination affects the risk of miscarriage for pregnancies conceived less than 90 days from vaccination. The increased risk estimate for miscarriages in a subgroup of pregnancies conceived any time after vaccination may be an artifact of a thorough set of sensitivity analyses, but since a genuine association cannot totally be ruled out, this signal should nevertheless be explored further in existing and future studies.Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00128661 and NCT01086709.

Background

Human papillomavirus (HPV) RNA detection is reportedly more specific for the detection of anogenital precancer than HPV DNA but it is unknown whether this is due to detection of RNA or due to HPV genotype restriction.

Methods

A total of 363 human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive men who have sex with men had two anal cytology samples taken and were evaluated using high-resolution anoscopy and biopsies of visible lesions. Anal specimens were tested for E6/E7 RNA for five carcinogenic HPV genotypes (HPV16, 18, 31, 33, and 45) and tested for the DNA of 13 carcinogenic HPV genotypes.

Results

DNA testing was more likely to be positive than RNA testing (53% vs. 48%; P = 0.02) for the same five HPV genotypes in aggregate. When restricted to five HPV genotypes targeted by the RNA test, the sensitivity to detect anal precancer was the same for DNA and RNA (81%), whereas RNA was more specific than DNA (65% vs. 58%; P = 0.007). In comparison, DNA detection of all 13 carcinogenic HPV genotypes was more sensitive (96% vs. 81%; P = 0.001) but much less specific (65% vs. 33%; P < 0.001) as compared with RNA detection of the five HPV genotypes.

Conclusion

After controlling for HPV genotypes, RNA was only slightly more specific than DNA detection for anal precancer.

Impact

DNA or RNA testing for a subset of the most carcinogenic HPV genotypes may be useful for distinguishing between those HPV-positive men at higher and lower risk of anal precancer and cancer.

Background

Human papillomaviruses (HPV) cause over 500 000 cervical cancers each year, most of which occur in low-resource settings. Human papillomavirus genotyping is important to study natural history and vaccine efficacy. We evaluated TypeSeq, a novel, next-generation, sequencing-based assay that detects 51 HPV genotypes, in 2 large international epidemiologic studies.

Methods

TypeSeq was evaluated in 2804 cervical specimens from the Study to Understand Cervical Cancer Endpoints and Early Determinants (SUCCEED) and in 2357 specimens from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (CVT). Positive agreement and risks of precancer for individual genotypes were calculated for TypeSeq in comparison to Linear Array (SUCCEED). In CVT, positive agreement and vaccine efficacy were calculated for TypeSeq and SPF10-LiPA.

Results

We observed high overall and positive agreement for most genotypes between TypeSeq and Linear Array in SUCCEED and SPF10-LiPA in CVT. There was no significant difference in risk of precancer between TypeSeq and Linear Array in SUCCEED or in estimates of vaccine efficacy between TypeSeq and SPF10-LiPA in CVT.

Conclusions

The agreement of TypeSeq with Linear Array and SPF10-LiPA, 2 well established standards for HPV genotyping, demonstrates its high accuracy. TypeSeq provides high-throughput, affordable HPV genotyping for world-wide studies of cervical precancer risk and of HPV vaccine efficacy.

Previously, we demonstrated similar human papillomavirus (HPV)16/18 vaccine efficacy estimates and stable HPV16/18 antibody levels four years postvaccination in a nonrandomized analysis of women who received a varying number of doses of the bivalent HPV16/18 vaccine. Here we extend data to seven years following initial vaccination. We evaluated HPV16/18-vaccinated women who received one (n = 134), two (n 0/1 = 193, n 0/6 = 79), or three doses (n = 2043) to a median of 6.9 years postvaccination. Cervical HPV DNA was measured with the SPF10- DEIA-LiPA PCR system; HPV16/18-specific antibody levels were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (n = 486). Infection and immunological measures were compared across vaccine dose groups. Prevalent HPV infection at year 7 was also compared with an unvaccinated control group (UCG). All statistical tests were two-sided. Among women in the three-dose, two-dose 0/6 , two-dose 0/1 , and one-dose groups, cumulative incident HPV16/18 infection rates (No. of events/No. of individuals) were 4.3% (88/2036, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.5% to 5.3%), 3.8% (3/78, 95% CI = 1.0% to 10.1%), 3.6% (7/192, 95% CI = 1.6% to 7.1%), and 1.5% (2/133, 95% CI = 0.3% to 4.9%; P = 1.00, .85, .17 comparing the two-dose 0/6 , two-dose 0/1 , and one-dose groups to the three-dose group, respectively). The prevalence of other carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic HPV types, excluding HPV16/18/31/33/45, were high and not statistically different among all dose groups, indicating that the low incidence of HPV16/18 in the one- and two-dose groups was not due to lack of exposure. At seven years, 100% of participants in all dose groups remained HPV16 and HPV18 seropositive. A non-statistically significant decrease in the geometric mean of the HPV16 antibody levels between years 4 and 7 was observed among women in the three-dose group: -10.8% (95% CI = -25.3% to 6.6%); two-dose (0/6 months) group: -17.3% (95% CI = -39.3% to 12.8%), two-dose (0/1 month) group: -6.9% (95% CI = -22.1% to 11.2%), and one-dose group: -5.5% (95% CI = -29.7% to 27.0%); results were similar for HPV18. At an average of seven years of follow-up, we observed similar low rates of HPV16/18 infections and slight, if any, decreases in HPV16/18 antibody levels by dose group.

The Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (CVT) was a randomized clinical trial conducted between 2004 and 2010, which randomized 7466 women aged 18 to 25 to receive the bivalent HPV-16/18 vaccine or control Hepatitis-A vaccine. Participants were followed for 4 years with cross-over vaccination at the study end. In 2010 the long term follow-up (LTFU) study was initiated to evaluate the 10-year impact of HPV-16/18 vaccination, determinants of the immune response, and HPV natural history in a vaccinated population. Herein, the rationale, design and methods of the LTFU study are described, which actively follows CVT participants in the HPV-arm 6 additional years at biennial intervals (3 additional study visits for 10 years of total follow-up), or more often if clinically indicated. According to the initial commitment, women in the Hepatitis-A arm were offered HPV vaccination at cross-over; they were followed 2 additional years and exited from the study. 92% of eligible CVT women accepted participation in LTFU. To provide underlying rates of HPV acquisition and cervical disease among unvaccinated women to compare with the HPV-arm during LTFU, a new unvaccinated control group (UCG) of women who are beyond the age generally recommended for routine vaccination was enrolled, and will be followed by cervical cancer screening over 6 years. To form the UCG, 5000 women were selected from a local census, of whom 2836 women (61% of eligible women) agreed to participate. Over 90% of participants complied with an interview, blood and cervical specimen collection. Evaluation of comparability between the original (Hepatitis-A arm of CVT) and new (UCG) control groups showed that women's characteristics, as well as their predicted future risk for cervical HPV acquisition, were similar, thus validating use of the UCG. LTFU is poised to comprehensively address many important questions related to long-term effects of prophylactic HPV vaccines.

Background

The AS04-adjuvanted HPV16/18 (AS04-HPV16/18) vaccine provides excellent protection against targeted human papillomavirus (HPV) types and a variable degree of cross-protection against others, including types 6/11/31/33/45. High efficacy against any cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or greater (CIN3+; >90%) suggests that lower levels of protection may exist for a wide range of oncogenic HPV types, which is difficult to quantify in individual trials. Pooling individual-level data from two randomized controlled trials, we aimed to evaluate AS04-HPV16/18 vaccine efficacy against incident HPV infections and cervical abnormalities .

Methods

Data were available from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (NCT00128661) and Papilloma Trial Against Cancer in Young Adults trial (NCT00122681), two large-scale, double-blind randomized controlled trials of the AS04-HPV16/18 vaccine. Primary analyses focused on disease-free women with no detectable cervicovaginal HPV at baseline.

Results

A total of 12 550 women were included in our primary analyses (HPV arm = 6271, control arm = 6279). Incidence of 6-month persistent oncogenic and nononcogenic infections, excluding known and accepted protected types 6/11/16/18/31/33/45 (focusing on 34/35/39/40/42/43/44/51/52/53/54/56/58/59/66/68/73/70/74), was statistically significantly lower in the HPV arm than in the control arm (efficacy = 9.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.7% to 17.4%). Statistically significant efficacy (P < .05) was observed for individual oncogenic types 16/18/31/33/45/52 and nononcogenic types 6/11/53/74. Efficacy against cervical abnormalities (all types) increased with severity, ranging from 27.7% (95% CI = 21.7% to 33.3%) to 58.7% (95% CI = 34.1% to 74.7%) for cytologic outcomes (low-grade squamous intraepithelial neoplasia lesion or greater, and high-grade squamous intraepithelial neoplasia lesion or greater, respectively) and 66.0% (95% CI = 54.4% to 74.9%) to 87.8% (95% CI = 71.1% to 95.7%) for histologic outcomes (CIN2+ and CIN3+, respectively). Comparing Costa Rica Vaccine Trial and Papilloma Trial Against Cancer in Young Adults results, there was no evidence of heterogeneity, except for type 51 (efficacy = -28.6% and 20.7%, respectively; two-sided P = .03).

Conclusions

The AS04-HPV16/18 vaccine provides some additional cross-protection beyond established protected types, which partially explains the high efficacy against CIN3+.

Background

Results from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (CVT) demonstrated partial cross-protection by the bivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which targets HPV-16 and HPV-18, against HPV-31, -33, and -45 infection and an increased incidence of HPV-51 infection.

Methods

A study nested within the CVT intention-to-treat cohort was designed to assess high-risk HPV variant lineage-specific vaccine efficacy (VE). The 2 main end points were (1) long-term incident infections persisting for ≥2 years and/or progression to high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (ie, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3 [CIN 2/3]) and (2) incident transient infections lasting for <2 years. For efficiency, incident infections due to HPV-16, -18, -31, -33, -35, -45, and -51 resulting in persistent infection and/or CIN 2/3 were matched (ratio, 1:2) to the more-frequent transient viral infections, by HPV type. Variant lineages were determined by sequencing the upstream regulatory region and/or E6 region.

Results

VEs against persistent or transient infections with HPV-16, -18, -33, -35, -45, and -51 did not differ significantly by variant lineage. As the possible exception, VEs against persistent infection and/or CIN 2/3 due to HPV-31 A/B and HPV-31C variants were -7.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], -33.9% to 0%) and 86.4% (95% CI, 65.1%-97.1%), respectively (P = .02 for test of equal VE). No difference in VE was observed by variant among transient HPV-31 infections (P = .68).

Conclusions

Overall, sequence variation at the variant level does not appear to explain partial cross-protection by the bivalent HPV vaccine.

Background

Human papillomavirus vaccines prevent human papillomavirus infection and cervical precancers. The impact of vaccinating women with a current infection or after treatment for an human papillomavirus-associated lesion is not fully understood.

Objectives

To determine whether human papillomavirus-16/18 vaccination influences the outcome of infections present at vaccination and the rate of infection and disease after treatment of lesions.

Study design

We included 1711 women (18-25 years) with carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection and 311 women of similar age who underwent treatment for cervical precancer and who participated in a community-based trial of the AS04-adjuvanted human papillomavirus-16/18 virus-like particle vaccine. Participants were randomized (human papillomavirus or hepatitis A vaccine) and offered 3 vaccinations over 6 months. Follow-up included annual visits (more frequently if clinically indicated), referral to colposcopy of high-grade and persistent low-grade lesions, treatment by loop electrosurgical excisional procedure when clinically indicated, and cytologic and virologic follow-up after treatment. Among women with human papillomavirus infection at the time of vaccination, we considered type-specific viral clearance, and development of cytologic (squamous intraepithelial lesions) and histologic (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia) lesions. Among treated women, we considered single-time and persistent human papillomavirus infection, squamous intraepithelial lesions, and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater. Outcomes associated with infections absent before treatment also were evaluated. Infection-level analyses were performed and vaccine efficacy estimated.

Results

Median follow-up was 56.7 months (women with human papillomavirus infection) and 27.3 months (treated women). There was no evidence of vaccine efficacy to increase clearance of human papillomavirus infections or decrease incidence of cytologic/histologic abnormalities associated with human papillomavirus types present at enrollment. Vaccine efficacy for human papillomavirus 16/18 clearance and against human papillomavirus 16/18 progression from infection to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater were -5.4% (95% confidence interval -19,10) and 0.3% (95% confidence interval -69,41), respectively. Among treated women, 34.1% had oncogenic infection and 1.6% had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater detected after treatment, respectively, and of these 69.8% and 20.0% were the result of new infections. We observed no significant effect of vaccination on rates of infection/lesions after treatment. Vaccine efficacy estimates for human papillomavirus 16/18 associated persistent infection and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater after treatment were 34.7% (95% confidence interval -131, 82) and -211% (95% confidence interval -2901, 68), respectively. We observed evidence for a partial and nonsignificant protective effect of vaccination against new infections absent before treatment. For incident human papillomavirus 16/18, human papillomavirus 31/33/45, and oncogenic human papillomavirus infections post-treatment, vaccine efficacy estimates were 57.9% (95% confidence interval -43, 88), 72.9% (95% confidence interval 29, 90), and 36.7% (95% confidence interval 1.5, 59), respectively.

Conclusion

We find no evidence for a vaccine effect on the fate of detectable human papillomavirus infections. We show that vaccination does not protect against infections/lesions after treatment. Evaluation of vaccine protection against new infections after treatment and resultant lesions warrants further consideration in future studies.

Background

Factors that lead human papillomavirus (HPV) infections to persist and progress to cancer are not fully understood. We evaluated co-factors for acquisition, persistence, and progression of non-HPV-16/18 infections among HPV-vaccinated women.

Methods

We analyzed 2153 women aged 18-25 years randomized to the HPV-vaccine arm of the Costa Rica HPV Vaccine Trial. Women were HPV DNA negative for all types at baseline and followed for approximately 11 years. Generalized estimating equation methods were used to account for correlated observations. Time-dependent factors evaluated were age, sexual behavior, marital status, hormonally related factors, number of full-term pregnancies (FTPs), smoking behavior, and baseline body mass index.

Results

A total of 1777 incident oncogenic non-HPV-16/18 infections were detected in 12 292 visits (average, 0.14 infections/visit). Age and sexual behavior-related variables were associated with oncogenic non-HPV-16/18 acquisition. Twenty-six percent of incident infections persisted for ≥1 year. None of the factors evaluated were statistically associated with persistence of oncogenic non-HPV-16/18 infections. Risk of progression to Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia grade 2 or worst (CIN2+) increased with increasing age (P for trend = .001), injectable contraceptive use (relative risk, 2.61 [95% confidence interval, 1.19-5.73] ever vs never), and increasing FTPs (P for trend = .034).

Conclusions

In a cohort of HPV-16/18-vaccinated women, age and sexual behavior variables are associated with acquisition of oncogenic non-HPV-16/18 infections; no notable factors are associated with persistence of acquired infections; and age, parity, and hormonally related exposures are associated with progression to CIN2+.