Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31160099›Full record

ArticleVaccine2019

Declines in HPV vaccine type prevalence in women screened for cervical cancer in the United States: Evidence of direct and herd effects of vaccination.

Lauri E Markowitz, Allison L Naleway, Rayleen M Lewis, Bradley Crane, Troy D Querec, Sheila Weinmann, Martin Steinau, Elizabeth R Unger

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The Future of Cervical Cancer Screening.International journal of women's health · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Lauri E MarkowitzNational Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA. Electronic address: LEM2@cdc.gov.
Allison L NalewayCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR 97227, USA.
Rayleen M LewisNational Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA; Synergy America, Inc., Duluth, GA 30097, USA.
Bradley CraneCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR 97227, USA.
Troy D QuerecNational Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.
Sheila WeinmannCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR 97227, USA.
Martin SteinauNational Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.
Elizabeth R UngerNational Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30329, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHuman papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been recommended in the United States since 2006 for routine vaccination of girls at age 11-12 years and through age 26 years for women not previously vaccinated. Changes in vaccine-type HPV (VT) prevalence can be used to evaluate vaccine impact, including herd effects.

methodsWe determined type-specific HPV in cytology specimens from women aged 20-29 years screened for cervical cancer at Kaiser Permanente Northwest in 2007 and in two vaccine era periods: 2012-2013 and 2015-2016. Detection and typing used L1 consensus PCR with hybridization for 37 types, including quadrivalent vaccine types (HPV 6/11/16/18).

resultsAmong 20-24 year-olds in 2012-2013 and 2015-2016, 44% and 64% had a history of ≥1-dose vaccination. VT prevalence decreased from 13.1% in 2007 to 2.9% in 2015-2016 (prevalence ratio [PR] = 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-0.29). HPV 31 prevalence was also lower in the vaccine periods compared with 2007. VT prevalence in 2015-2016 among 20-24 year-olds was lower in both vaccinated, 1.3% (PR = 0.10; 95% CI 0.06-0.16), and unvaccinated women, 5.8% (PR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.33-0.61). Among 25-29 year-olds, 21% and 32% had a history of ≥1-dose vaccination. VT prevalence decreased from 8.1% in 2007 to 5.0% in 2015-2016 (PR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.50-0.78). Non-VT high risk prevalence was higher in the vaccine periods compared with the pre-vaccine era in both age groups, however, not in 2015-2016 compared with 2012-2013.

conclusionWithin 9-10 years of vaccine introduction, VT prevalence decreased 78% among 20-24 year-olds and 38% in 25-29 year-olds. There were declines in both vaccinated and unvaccinated women, showing evidence of direct and herd protection.

Indexed as

Immunity, HerdAdultCytological TechniquesFemaleGenotypeHumansPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesPrevalenceUnited StatesUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaccinationYoung AdultPapillomavirus VaccinesHerd effectsHPV prevalenceHPV vaccineHuman papillomavirusVaccine impact

Identifiers

PMID31160099
PMCPMC12696877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.