The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly affected utilization of preventative health care, including vaccines. We aimed to assess HPV vaccination rates during the pandemic, and conduct a simulation model-based analysis to estimate the impact of current coverage and future pandemic recovery scenarios on disease outcomes. The model population included females and males of all ages in the US. The model compares pre-COVID vaccine uptake to 3 reduced coverage scenarios with varying recovery speed. Vaccine coverage was obtained from Truven Marketscan™. Substantially reduced coverage between March-August 2020 was observed compared to 2018–2019. The model predicted that 130,853 to 213,926 additional cases of genital warts; 22,503 to 48,157 cases of CIN1; 48,682 to 110,192 cases of CIN2/3; and 2,882 to 6,487 cases of cervical cancer will occur over the next 100 years, compared to status quo. Providers should plan efforts to recover HPV vaccination and minimize potential long-term consequences.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to significant reductions in the administration of routinely recommended vaccines among adolescents in the US including tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (T...

The US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice recommends routine human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination at 11–12 years of age, but states that vaccination may be initiated as early as 9 years. Our primary goal was to assess whether initiating HPV vaccination at 9–10 years of age, compared to 11–12, was associated with a higher rate of series completion by 13 years of age, and to identify factors associated with series completion by age 13. The study used vaccine claims and other data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters (privately insured) and IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid (publicly insured) databases. Participants were 9–12 years of age and initiated HPV vaccination between January 2006 and December 2018 (publicly insured) or February 2019 (privately insured). Among 100,117 privately insured individuals, those initiating the HPV vaccination series at 9–10 years of age had a significantly higher series completion rate by 13 years of age than did those initiating at 11–12 years of age (76.2% versus 48.1%; p < .001). The same pattern was observed for 115,863 publicly insured individuals (70.4% versus 40.0%; p < .001). Provider and health care plan type, female sex, race/ethnicity, and wellness checks or non-HPV vaccinations during the baseline period were significantly associated with series completion by 13 years of age. Proactive initiation of HPV vaccination at 9–10 years of age was associated with higher rates of series completion by 13 years of age. These findings can inform provider education and other interventions to encourage timely HPV vaccination series completion.

Although no human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is indicated for single-dose administration, some observational evidence suggests that a 1-dose regimen might reduce HPV infection risk to that achieved with 2 doses. This study estimated the potential health and economic outcomes associated with switching from a 2-dose HPV vaccination program for girls and boys aged 13-14 years to an off-label 9-valent (9vHPV), 1-dose regimen, accounting for the uncertainty of the effectiveness and durability of a single dose. A dynamic HPV transmission infection and disease model was adapted to the United Kingdom and included a probabilistic sensitivity analysis using estimated distributions for duration of protection of 1-dose and degree of protection of 1 relative to 2 doses. One-way sensitivity analyses of key inputs were performed. Outcomes included additional cancer and disease cases and the difference in net monetary benefit (NMB). The 1-dose program was predicted to result in 81,738 additional HPV-related cancer cases in males and females over 100 years compared to the 2-dose program, ranging from 36,673 to 134,347 additional cases (2.5% and 97.5% quantiles, respectively), and had a 7.8% probability of being cost-effective at the £20,000/quality-adjusted life years willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the number of additional cancer cases was sensitive to the median of the duration of protection distribution and coverage rates. The differences in NMBs were sensitive to the median of the duration of protection distribution, dose price and discount rate, but not coverage variations. Across sensitivity analyses, the probability of 1 dose being cost-effective vs 2 doses was < 50% at the standard WTP threshold. Adoption of a 1-dose 9vHPV vaccination program resulted in more vaccine-preventable HPV-related cancer and disease cases in males and females, introduced substantial uncertainty in health and economic outcomes, and had a low probability of being cost-effective compared to the 2-dose program.

Aim: The objective of this study was to estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of switching from a bivalent to a nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination program in Norway, incorporating all nonavalent vaccine-preventable HPV-related diseases and in the context of the latest cervical cancer screening program.Methods: A well-established dynamic transmission model of the natural history of HPV infection and disease was adapted to the Norwegian population. We determined the number of cases of HPV-related diseases and subsequent number of deaths, and the economic burden of HPV-related disease under the current standard of care conditions of bivalent and nonavalent vaccinations of girls and boys aged 12 years.Results: Compared to bivalent vaccination, nonavalent vaccination averted an additional 4,357 cases of HPV-related cancers, 421,925 cases of genital warts, and 543 cases of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP) over a 100-year time horizon. Nonavalent vaccination also averted an additional 1,044 deaths over the 100-year time horizon when compared with bivalent vaccination. Total costs were higher for the nonavalent strategy (10.5 billion NOK [€1.03 billion] vs. 9.3-9.4 billion NOK [€915-925 million] for bivalent vaccination). A switch to nonavalent vaccination had a higher vaccination cost (4.4 billion NOK [€433 million] vs. 2.7 billion NOK [€266 million] for bivalent vaccination) but resulted in a savings of 627-694 million NOK [€62-68 million] in treatment costs. A switch to nonavalent vaccination demonstrated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 102,500 NOK (€10,086) per QALY versus bivalent vaccination.Conclusions: Using a model that incorporated the full range of HPV-related diseases, and the latest cervical cancer screening practices, we found that switching from bivalent to nonavalent vaccination would be considered cost-effective in Norway.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is one of the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States and can lead to cervical, vulvovaginal, anal, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers. Compared wi...