The sexual ethics of HPV vaccination for boys

Ecological preferences and patient autonomy

Healthcare systems contribute considerably to worldwide carbon emissions and therefore reinforce the negative health impacts of climate change. Significant attempts to reduce emissions have been made on the macro level of politics and on the institutional level. Less attention has been paid so far to decisions that take place at the micro level of immediate doctor-patient contact. Current bioethical debates discuss potential tensions between 'Green Healthcare' and an orientation towards ethical principles such as promoting patient welfare or respect for patient autonomy. The article addresses this debate from a different angle starting from the premise that at least some patients might have a preference to reduce carbon outputs that are often deeply rooted in their personal value system. Taking different accounts of patient autonomy as a starting point, the article analyses whether such preferences must be respected as being part of patient autonomy. The analysis comes to a positive conclusion but highlights that certain factors such as misinterpretation, lack of understanding or pressure must be carefully considered. In addition, a patient's climate-related preference does not per se justify the choice of treatment but must be integrated into shared decision-making and reconciled with the healthcare professional's expert judgement on the intervention being a legitimate and promising way for reaching certain treatment goals. As a recommendation, empirical research on stakeholders' attitudes, knowledge and practice regarding ecological sustainability in clinical decision-making is needed together with further ethical analyses.

A review of ethical and legal aspects of gender-neutral human papillomavirus vaccination

While launching a campaign to eliminate cervical cancer, the World Health Organization called to halt human papillomavirus (HPV) gender-neutral vaccination (GNV) because of limited vaccine supply, raising ethical and legal questions about female-only vaccination versus GNV. We identified ethical and legal aspects of HPV GNV by searching MEDLINE for records up to February 19, 2021. We also provided an overview of HPV vaccines, the evolution of HPV vaccine recommendations in North America, and a timeline of male HPV vaccination introduction by searching PubMed, Google, and government websites. Four HPV vaccines are available: Cervarix®, Gardasil®, Gardasil®9, and Cecolin®. Vaccine recommendations in North America evolved from female only to eventually include males. Following the Food and Drug Administration's approval of the first HPV vaccine for males (2009), 35 countries began vaccinating males (2011-2020). Based on 56 eligible records out of 652, we identified the following constructs: lower male awareness of HPV and vaccination (n=13), limited economic resources (n=5), shared social responsibility (n=18), unprotected groups from female-only HPV vaccination (n=10), limited screening for HPV-associated noncervical cancers (n=6), consideration of ethical principles (n=17), and HPV vaccine mandates (n=5). Ethical and legal aspects must be considered when recommending vaccination for females only or GNV.

Vaccinating for Whom? Distinguishing between Self-Protective, Paternalistic, Altruistic and Indirect Vaccination

Preventive vaccination can protect not just vaccinated individuals, but also others, which is often a central point in discussions about vaccination. To date, there has been no systematic study of self- and other-directed motives behind vaccination. This article has two major goals: first, to examine and distinguish between self- and other-directed motives behind vaccination, especially with regard to vaccinating for the sake of third parties, and second, to explore some ways in which this approach can help to clarify and guide vaccination debates and policy. I propose conceiving of vaccination in terms of three basic elements: the vaccination decision-maker, the vaccine recipient and the primary beneficiary. I develop a taxonomy based on the relations between these elements to distinguish four kinds of vaccination: self-protective, paternalistic, altruistic and indirect. I finally discuss the case of human papillomavirus vaccine regulation for men and women to show how each kind of vaccination is associated with and raises specific ethical questions.

Correlates of HPV vaccine initiation and provider recommendation among male adolescents, 2014 NIS-Teen

Vaccination is a safe and effective way to prevent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection and related cancers; however, HPV vaccine uptake remains low in the US. After the 2011 Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendation for routine HPV vaccination of adolescent males, several studies have examined predictors for initiating the vaccine series in this population of interest, particularly with regard to provider recommendations. This study examined racial and ethnic differences for HPV vaccine initiation and provider recommendation in male adolescents. Based on prior HPV vaccine uptake estimates and healthcare utilization data, we hypothesized that minority adolescents would be more likely to initiate HPV vaccines, but less likely to receive a provider recommendation compared to white counterparts. We analyzed the 2014 National Immunization Survey-Teen (NIS-Teen), which included 10,753 male adolescents with provider-verified vaccination data in 50 US states, using multivariate logistic regression models to evaluate racial/ethnic differences in HPV vaccine initiation and provider recommendation. The odds of HPV vaccine initiation were 76 percent higher for Hispanic adolescents and 43 percent higher for non-Hispanic Other or Multiple race adolescents compared to white adolescents. Approximately half of parents reported receiving a provider recommendation for vaccination, with no significant difference in the odds of receiving a provider recommendation across racial/ethnic groups. Despite similar frequency of recommendations across racial and ethnic groups, male adolescents who are racial/ethnic minorities are more likely to initiate vaccination. Future research should focus on developing tailored interventions to increase HPV vaccine receipt among males of all racial/ethnic groups.

Human papillomavirus vaccination and the role of herd effects in future cancer control planning: a review

INTRODUCTION

Vaccine herd effects are the indirect protection that vaccinated persons provide to those who remain susceptible to infection, due to the reduced transmission of infections. Herd effects have been an important part of the discourse on how to best implement human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines and prevent HPV-related diseases.

AREAS COVERED

In this paper, we review the theory of HPV vaccine herd effects derived from mathematical models, give an account of observed HPV vaccine herd effects worldwide, and examine the implications of vaccine herd effects for future cervical cancer screening efforts.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

HPV vaccine herd effects improve the cost-effectiveness of vaccinating preadolescent girls, but contribute to making gender-neutral vaccination less economically efficient. Vaccination coverage and sexual mixing patterns by age are strong determinants of herd effects. Many countries worldwide are starting to observe reductions in HPV-related outcomes likely attributable to herd effects, most notably declining anogenital warts in young men, and declining HPV-16/18 infection prevalence in young unvaccinated women. Policy makers making recommendations for cervical cancer screening will have to consider HPV vaccination coverage and herd effects, as these will affect the positive predictive value of screening and the risk of cervical cancer in unvaccinated women.

The Ethics of Vaccination Nudges in Pediatric Practice

Techniques from behavioral economics-nudges-may help physicians increase pediatric vaccine compliance, but critics have objected that nudges can undermine autonomy. Since autonomy is a centrally important value in healthcare decision-making contexts, it counts against pediatric vaccination nudges if they undermine parental autonomy. Advocates for healthcare nudges have resisted the charge that nudges undermine autonomy, and the recent bioethics literature illustrates the current intractability of this debate. This article rejects a principle to which parties on both sides of this debate sometimes seem committed: that nudges are morally permissible only if they are consistent with autonomy. Instead, I argue that, at least in the case of pediatric vaccination, some autonomy-undermining nudges may be morally justified. This is because parental autonomy in pediatric decision-making is not as morally valuable as the autonomy of adult patients, and because the interests of both the vaccinated child and other members of the community can sometimes be weighty enough to justify autonomy-infringing pediatric vaccination nudges. This article concludes with a set of worries about the effect of pediatric vaccination nudges on parent-physician relationships, and it calls on the American Academy of Pediatrics to draw on scientific and bioethics research to develop guidelines for the use of nudges in pediatric practice and, in particular, for the use of pediatric vaccination nudges.

Extending the Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Programme to Include Males in High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness Studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Giving the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to females has been shown to be cost-effective in most countries. The epidemiological evidence and economic burden of HPV-related diseases have gradually been shown to be gender neutral. Randomized clinical trials report high efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of the HPV vaccine in males aged 16-26 years. Some pioneering countries extended their HPV vaccination programme to include males, regardless of the cost-effectiveness analysis results. Nevertheless, decision makers need evidence provided by modelling and economic studies to justify the funding of mass vaccination. This systematic review aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of extending the HPV vaccination programme to include males living in high-income countries.

METHODS

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness analyses of HPV vaccination in males was performed. Data were extracted and analysed using a checklist adapted from the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards Statement.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies and 12 underlying mathematical models were identified. Model filiation showed evolution in time from aggregate models (static and dynamic) to individual-based models. When considering the health outcomes HPV vaccines are licensed for, regardless of modelling approaches and assumptions, extending vaccinations to males is rarely found to be cost-effective in heterosexual populations. Cost-effectiveness ratios become more attractive when all HPV-related diseases are considered and when vaccine coverage in females is below 40%.

CONCLUSION

Targeted vaccination of men who have sex with men (MSM) seems to be the best cost-effectiveness option. The feasibility of this strategy is still an open question, since early identification of this specific population remains difficult.

Human papillomavirus vaccination for men: advancing policy and practice

ABSTRACT 

The quadrivalent HPV vaccine (HPV4) is safe and highly efficacious, and can significantly reduce the burden of HPV-related genital warts and cancers among men, in addition to promoting herd immunity. Nevertheless, HPV4 coverage among boys remains low in most settings. Research to date has focused predominantly on HPV vaccination of girls to prevent cervical cancer. Most countries with publicly funded healthcare where HPV4 is licensed cover the costs of HPV vaccination programs for girls only. We critically review the evidence for extending publicly funded HPV vaccination programs to boys in addition to girls. After an overview of research on HPV prevalence and associated cancers among men, we review cost–effectiveness studies, benefits of universal versus targeted vaccination approaches and multifaceted health equity concerns, along with directions in vaccine delivery programs and intervention research to promote HPV vaccine uptake for boys. Comprehensive evaluation of the systematic exclusion of boys from publicly financed HPV vaccination programs is warranted given tremendous public health implications of new infections and subsequent cancers that could have otherwise been averted.