Design and statistical considerations for studies evaluating the efficacy of a single dose of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine

Rationale and design of a double-blind randomized non-inferiority clinical trial to evaluate one or two doses of vaccine against human papillomavirus including an epidemiologic survey to estimate vaccine efficacy: The Costa Rica ESCUDDO trial

HPV vaccination of adolescent girls is the most effective measure to prevent cervical cancer. The World Health Organization recommends that adolescent girls receive two doses of vaccine but only a small proportion of girls from regions with the highest disease burden are vaccinated because of cost and logistical considerations. Our Costa Rica HPV Vaccine trial suggested that one dose of the bivalent HPV vaccine provides robust and lasting protection against persistent HPV infections for over a decade. Data from a post-licensure trial of the quadrivalent vaccine in India also suggested that a single dose may be effective in reducing cervical cancer risk. To formally compare one versus two doses of the bivalent and nonavalent HPV vaccines, we implemented a large, randomized, double-blind trial to investigate the non-inferiority of one compared to two vaccine doses in the prevention of new HPV16/18 infections that persist 6 or more months. Bivalent and nonavalent vaccines will be evaluated separately. The trial enrolled and randomized (1:1:1:1 to 1- and 2-dose arms of the bivalent and nonavalent vaccines) 20,330 girls 12 to 16 years old residing in Costa Rica. Trial participants are followed every 6 months for up to 5 years. We also aim to estimate vaccine efficacy by comparing the rates of 6 month persistent infection in unvaccinated women with the rates in the follow-up visits of trial participants. We included one survey of unvaccinated women at the start of the study (N = 4452) and will include another survey concomitant with follow up visits of trial participants at year 4.5 (planned N = 3000). Survey participants attend two visits 6 months appart. Herein, we present the rationale, design, and enrolled study population of the ESCUDDO trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03180034.

Evaluation of serological assays to monitor antibody responses to single-dose HPV vaccines

INTRODUCTION

Whether existing serological assays are sufficiently robust to measure the lower antibody levels expected following single-dose HPV vaccination is unknown.

METHODS

We evaluated seven assays measuring HPV-16/18 immunological responses overall and by number of doses in 530 serum samples from participants receiving varying doses of Cervarix or Gardasil up to 36-months post-vaccination. Serum was evaluated by simplex (HPV-16 ELISA, HPV-18 ELISA), multiplex (LIA-4, VLP-MIA, M9ELISA, GST-L1), and high-throughput pseudovirion-based neutralization assays (HT-PBNA), and results were compared to the gold standard HPV-16/18 secreted alkaline phosphatase neutralization assay (SEAP-NA). Reproducibility was assessed by the coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Percent agreement, Pearson correlation, and weighted-kappa were used to assess validity. Determinants of seronegativity were evaluated by chi-squared test.

RESULTS

HPV-16: Seropositivity range was 97.1-99.5% for single dose and 98.8-99.8% overall. CV range was 4.0-18.0% for single dose and 2.9-19.5% overall. ICC range was 0.77-0.99 for single dose and 0.74-0.99 overall. Correlation with SEAP-NA range was 0.43-0.85 for single dose and 0.51-0.90 overall. Weighted-kappa range was 0.34-0.82 for single dose and 0.45-0.84 overall. HPV-18: Seropositivity range was 63.9-94.7% for single dose and 86.2-97.9% overall. CV range was 8.1-18.2% for single dose and 4.6-18.6% overall. ICC range was 0.75-0.99 for single dose and 0.83-0.99 overall. Correlation with SEAP-NA range was 0.31-0.99 for single dose and 0.27-0.96 overall. Weighted-kappa range was 0.35-0.83 for single dose and 0.45-0.84 overall. HPV-16 seronegativity was <5% for all assays. HPV-18 seronegativity range was 5.5-17.3%. For LIA-4 and GST-L1 where the proportion of seronegativity was >10%, the strongest correlates of seronegativity were receiving a single vaccine dose and receiving Gardasil.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the utility of existing serological assays to monitor antibody responses following single-dose HPV vaccination.

Confidence intervals for the difference between two relative risks

We provide methods to estimate the confidence interval for the difference between two relative risks. Letting p₀, p₁, and p₂ be the probabilities of an event in three groups (i.e. control, treatment 1, treatment 2), our methods estimate a confidence interval for r = p₁/p₀ - p₂/p₀. We highlight that our methods can handle small sample sizes, covariates, and study populations from multiple strata. We specifically developed these methods for vaccine trials to estimate the difference between two vaccine efficacies, where VE₁ = 1 - p₁/p₀, VE₂ = 1 - p₂/p₀ and r = VE₂ - VE₁. We showcase our methods by using interim data from one of these trials to suggest that one dose of the human papillomavirus vaccine may be as efficacious as two doses of the vaccine.

Efficacy and immunogenicity of a single dose of human papillomavirus vaccine compared to no vaccination or standard three and two-dose vaccination regimens: A systematic review of evidence from clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the efficacy and immunogenicity of single-dose HPV vaccination compared to no vaccination or multi-dose schedules among vaccine trial participants.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, Global Health Database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for publications and conference abstracts (dated January 1999-August 2018) using MeSH and non-MeSH terms for human papillomavirus AND vaccines AND (immunogenicity OR efficacy/effectiveness) AND dosage. Search results were screened against pre-specified eligibility criteria. Data were extracted from included articles, and a narrative synthesis conducted on efficacy against HPV16/18 infection and humoral immunogenicity.

RESULTS

Seven of 6,523 unique records identified were included in the review. Six were nested observational studies of participants randomised to receive two or three doses in three large HPV vaccine trials, in which some participants did not complete their allocated schedules. One small pilot study prospectively allocated participants to receive one or no vaccine dose. Frequency of HPV16/18 infection was low (e.g. <1% for 12-month-persistent infection) in all vaccinated participants up to seven years post vaccination and did not significantly differ by number of doses (p > 0.05 in all cases). Frequency of infection was significantly lower in one-dose recipients compared to unvaccinated controls (p < 0.01 for all infection endpoints in each study). HPV16/18 seropositivity rates were high in all HPV vaccine recipients (100% in three of four studies reporting this endpoint), though antibody levels were lower with one compared to two or three doses.

CONCLUSIONS

This review supports the premise that one HPV vaccine dose may be as effective in preventing HPV infection as multi-dose schedules in healthy young women. However, it also highlights the paucity of available evidence from purpose-designed, prospectively-randomised trials. Results from ongoing clinical trials assessing the efficacy and immunogenicity of single-dose HPV vaccination compared to currently-recommended schedules are awaited.

Comparison of different human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine types and dose schedules for prevention of HPV-related disease in females and males

BACKGROUND

Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine remains low in many countries, although the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines given as a three-dose schedule are effective in the prevention of precancerous lesions of the cervix in women. Simpler immunisation schedules, such as those with fewer doses, might reduce barriers to vaccination, as may programmes that include males.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and harms of different dose schedules and different types of HPV vaccines in females and males.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches on 27 September 2018 in Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (in the Cochrane Library), and Ovid Embase. We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov (both 27 September 2018), vaccine manufacturer websites, and checked reference lists from an index of HPV studies and other relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with no language restriction. We considered studies if they enrolled HIV-negative males or females aged 9 to 26 years, or HIV-positive males or females of any age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used methods recommended by Cochrane. We use the term 'control' to refer to comparator products containing an adjuvant or active vaccine and 'placebo' to refer to products that contain no adjuvant or active vaccine. Most primary outcomes in this review were clinical outcomes. However, for comparisons comparing dose schedules, the included RCTs were designed to measure antibody responses (i.e. immunogenicity) as the primary outcome, rather than clinical outcomes, since it is unethical to collect cervical samples from girls under 16 years of age. We analysed immunogenicity outcomes (i.e. geometric mean titres) with ratios of means, clinical outcomes (e.g. cancer and intraepithelial neoplasia) with risk ratios or rate ratios and, for serious adverse events and deaths, we calculated odds ratios. We rated the certainty of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 RCTs with 31,940 participants. The length of follow-up in the included studies ranged from seven months to five years. Two doses versus three doses of HPV vaccine in 9- to 15-year-old females Antibody responses after two-dose and three-dose HPV vaccine schedules were similar after up to five years of follow-up (4 RCTs, moderate- to high-certainty evidence). No RCTs collected clinical outcome data. Evidence about serious adverse events in studies comparing dose schedules was of very low-certainty owing to imprecision and indirectness (three doses 35/1159; two doses 36/1158; 4 RCTs). One death was reported in the three-dose group (1/898) and none in the two-dose group (0/899) (low-certainty evidence). Interval between doses of HPV vaccine in 9- to 14-year-old females and males Antibody responses were stronger with a longer interval (6 or 12 months) between the first two doses of HPV vaccine than a shorter interval (2 or 6 months) at up to three years of follow-up (4 RCTs, moderate- to high-certainty evidence). No RCTs collected data about clinical outcomes. Evidence about serious adverse events in studies comparing intervals was of very low-certainty, owing to imprecision and indirectness. No deaths were reported in any of the studies (0/1898, 3 RCTs, low-certainty evidence). HPV vaccination of 10- to 26-year-old males In one RCT there was moderate-certainty evidence that quadrivalent HPV vaccine, compared with control, reduced the incidence of external genital lesions (control 36 per 3081 person-years; quadrivalent 6 per 3173 person-years; rate ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38; 6254 person-years) and anogenital warts (control 28 per 2814 person-years; quadrivalent 3 per 2831 person-years; rate ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38; 5645 person-years). The quadrivalent vaccine resulted in more injection-site adverse events, such as pain or redness, than control (537 versus 601 per 1000; risk ratio (RR) 1.12, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.18, 3895 participants, high-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence from two RCTs about serious adverse events with quadrivalent vaccine (control 12/2588; quadrivalent 8/2574), and about deaths (control 11/2591; quadrivalent 3/2582), owing to imprecision and indirectness. Nonavalent versus quadrivalent vaccine in 9- to 26-year-old females and males Three RCTs were included; one in females aged 9- to 15-years (n = 600), one in females aged 16- to 26-years (n = 14,215), and one in males aged 16- to 26-years (n = 500). The RCT in 16- to 26-year-old females reported clinical outcomes. There was little to no difference in the incidence of the combined outcome of high-grade cervical epithelial neoplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cervical cancer between the HPV vaccines (quadrivalent 325/6882, nonavalent 326/6871; OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16; 13,753 participants; high-certainty evidence). The other two RCTs did not collect data about clinical outcomes. There were slightly more local adverse events with the nonavalent vaccine (905 per 1000) than the quadrivalent vaccine (846 per 1000) (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.08; 3 RCTs, 15,863 participants; high-certainty evidence). Comparative evidence about serious adverse events in the three RCTs (nonavalent 243/8234, quadrivalent 192/7629; OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.61) was of low certainty, owing to imprecision and indirectness. HPV vaccination for people living with HIV Seven RCTs reported on HPV vaccines in people with HIV, with two small trials that collected data about clinical outcomes. Antibody responses were higher following vaccination with either bivalent or quadrivalent HPV vaccine than with control, and these responses could be demonstrated to have been maintained for up to 24 months in children living with HIV (low-certainty evidence). The evidence about clinical outcomes and harms for HPV vaccines in people with HIV is very uncertain (low- to very low-certainty evidence), owing to imprecision and indirectness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The immunogenicity of two-dose and three-dose HPV vaccine schedules, measured using antibody responses in young females, is comparable. The quadrivalent vaccine probably reduces external genital lesions and anogenital warts in males compared with control. The nonavalent and quadrivalent vaccines offer similar protection against a combined outcome of cervical, vaginal, and vulval precancer lesions or cancer. In people living with HIV, both the bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines result in high antibody responses. For all comparisons of alternative HPV vaccine schedules, the certainty of the body of evidence about serious adverse events reported during the study periods was low or very low, either because the number of events was low, or the evidence was indirect, or both. Post-marketing surveillance is needed to continue monitoring harms that might be associated with HPV vaccines in the population, and this evidence will be incorporated in future updates of this review. Long-term observational studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of reduced-dose schedules against HPV-related cancer endpoints, and whether adopting these schedules improves vaccine coverage rates.

Disparities and reverse disparities in HPV vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Studies disagree about whether racial and ethnic groups have lower or higher human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination uptake, an important issue given large disparities in some HPV cancers. We sought to characterize and explain racial and ethnic differences in HPV vaccination. We systematically searched PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science to identify US studies through mid-2017 reporting associations of race and ethnicity with HPV vaccination. We identified 118 studies (n = 3,095,486) published in English that reported HPV vaccine initiation or follow-through in the US from which we could calculate effect sizes. We used random effects meta-analysis to synthesize effect sizes for comparisons of Whites or non-Hispanics to Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, or all minority groups combined. Studies showed no racial or ethnic differences in HPV vaccine initiation overall. However, when restricting to studies using provider-verified vaccination data, minorities were 6.1% [3.3%-8.8%] more likely than Whites to initiate HPV vaccination. Advantages were larger for Hispanics, males, and younger samples (age < 18). In contrast, minorities were 8.6% [5.6%, 11.7%], less likely than Whites to follow-through with the full HPV vaccine series, a disparity present across all participant and study characteristics. More recent studies found larger advantages for racial and ethnic minorities in HPV vaccine initiation and smaller disparities in follow-through. In summary, high-quality studies found racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to initiate but less likely to follow-through with HPV vaccination, a clear finding that self-report studies obscure. Higher HPV vaccine initiation among minorities suggests potential reductions in HPV cancer disparities.

Human Papillomavirus Research: Where Should We Place Our Bets?

BACKGROUND

Massive strides have been made with respect to primary and secondary prevention of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated disease as a result of prophylactic vaccination and cervical screening based on molecular HPV testing. However, cervical cancer continues to be an important clinical and societal burden. Additionally, other HPV-associated cancers, for which there are no screening programmes, are rising. Finally, the optimal combination of vaccination and screening strategies will require careful thinking. Considering this unprecedented and important time, we were keen to solicit the views of the expert community to determine what they perceived were the key priorities for HPV research. Our objective was to identify consensus and key priorities for HPV-based research through provision of a questionnaire disseminated to a multidisciplinary group of key opinion leaders (KOLs).

SUMMARY

A structured survey composed of 46 HPV research "categories" was sent to 73 KOLs who were invited to "rank" the categories according to priority. The invitees represented clinical and public health disciplines as well as basic scientists. Scores were weighted according to the number of responses. Invitees also had the opportunity to comment on barriers to the research and suggest other research areas that required attention not reflected in the survey. We received 29 responses in total; overall, the 3 highest-ranked categories were "optimal cervical screening in low and middle-income countries (LMICs)," "primary disease prevention in LMICs" and "impact of vaccine on HPV infection and associated disease." "HPV and the microbiome" and "mechanisms of transformation" were the highest-ranked categories with respect to basic research. Consistent barriers to research were around governance on the use of samples and data and funding, particularly in an era of vaccination. Key Messages: Research to support the management of disease in LMICs is clearly perceived as a priority in the international community in addition to other diverse areas which necessitate an improved basic understanding of viral mechanisms and interactions. International, multidisciplinary efforts which articulate the broader HPV research agenda will be important when seeking funding in addition to international endeavours to support the efficient use of existing samples and cohorts to facilitate such research.

Persistence of Immunity When Using Different Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Schedules and Booster-Dose Effects 5 Years After Primary Vaccination

Background

There are limited data regarding the duration of immunity induced by different human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination schedules and the immunogenicity of a booster dose of both bivalent HPV vaccine (bHPV) or quadrivalent HPV vaccine (qHPV).

Methods

Follow-up of a nonrandomized clinical trial to evaluate the 5-year antibody persistence of the bHPV in girls (age, 9-10 years) and women (age, 18-24 years). Noninferiority of the 2-dose versus 3-dose schedule among girls was evaluated at months 54 (n = 639) and 64 (n = 990). Girls vaccinated with a 2-dose schedule of bHPV or qHPV received a booster dose of either vaccine at month 61. Immunogenicity was measured using a virus-like particle-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Geometric mean titers (GMTs) for HPV16/18 were estimated after stratification by vaccination schedule and age group.

Results

At months 54 and 64, the 2-dose schedule remained noninferior to the 3-dose schedule. GMTs remained above natural infection levels across all age groups up to 64 months. After the booster, anti-HPV16/18 GMTs increased exponentially with the same pattern, regardless of vaccine administered. No safety concerns were identified with the booster dose.

Conclusions

A 2-dose schedule is highly immunogenic in girls, suggesting a high immune memory. Thus, a booster dose is likely to be unprofitable, considering the low global immunization coverage.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT01717118.