Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015 Jan;24(1):111-8. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0628. Epub 2014 Oct 9.

The age distribution of type-specific high-risk human papillomavirus incidence in two population-based screening trials.

Author information

1
Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. n.veldhuijzen@vumc.nl.
2
Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
3
Cancer Epidemiology Unit, CERMS, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
4
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute (ISPO), Florence, Italy.
5
Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
6
Department of Pathology, VU University Medical Centre (VUmc), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
7
Center for Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, AO City of Health and Science, Turin, Italy.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Age- and type-specific high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) incidence estimates in screen-eligible women are relevant from a public health perspective because they provide an indication of the effect of vaccination on the occurrence of screen-positives in HPV-based screening. However, limited data from women over 25 years of age are available.

METHODS:

In 24,105 hrHPV-negative women participating in Dutch (Population-Based Screening Study Amsterdam: POBASCAM) and Italian (New Technologies for Cervical Cancer: NTCC) population-based randomized controlled screening trials the age- and type-specific distribution of incident hrHPV infections detected at the next screening round was assessed. HPV types were grouped into vaccine (bivalent: HPV16/18; polyvalent HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58) and nonvaccine types.

RESULTS:

The incidence of screen-detected hrHPV among women ages 29 to 56 years was 2.54% (95% confidence interval, 2.30-2.78) in POBASCAM and 2.77% (2.36-3.19) in NTCC. In both studies, the incidence of bivalent, polyvalent, and nonpolyvalent infections decreased with age (P < 0.0001). Among women with incident infection(s), vaccine-type positivity changed quadratically with age, in particular for the polyvalent vaccine (P values: POBASCAM: bivalent 0.264, polyvalent 0.038; NTCC bivalent 0.039, polyvalent 0.005). However, more than 20% and 50% of women with incident hrHPV were positive for bivalent and polyvalent vaccine types, respectively, in all ages in both studies.

CONCLUSIONS:

We observed decreasing age trends of hrHPV vaccine and nonvaccine type incidences and age-related differences in the vaccine-type positivity among women with incident infections. Most importantly, hrHPV infections continued to be detected in all ages and the contribution of vaccine types remained substantial.

IMPACT:

Our results indicate a considerable reduction of new hrHPV infections in vaccinated cohorts, ensuing revision of screening guidelines.

PMID:
25300476
DOI:
10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0628
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire
Loading ...
Support Center