Population-Level Effects of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Programs on Infections with Nonvaccine Genotypes

We analyzed human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalences during prevaccination and postvaccination periods to consider possible changes in nonvaccine HPV genotypes after introduction of vaccines that confer protection against 2 high-risk types, HPV16 and HPV18. Our meta-analysis included 9 studies with data for 13,886 girls and women ≤19 years of age and 23,340 women 20–24 years of age. We found evidence of cross-protection for HPV31 among the younger age group after vaccine introduction but little evidence for reductions of HPV33 and HPV45. For the group this same age group, we also found slight increases in 2 nonvaccine high-risk HPV types (HPV39 and HPV52) and in 2 possible high-risk types (HPV53 and HPV73). However, results between age groups and vaccines used were inconsistent, and the increases had possible alternative explanations; consequently, these data provided no clear evidence for type replacement. Continued monitoring of these HPV genotypes is important

Comparison of Real-Time Multiplex Human Papillomavirus (HPV) PCR Assays with INNO-LiPA HPV Genotyping Extra Assay▿

Real-time type-specific multiplex human papillomavirus (HPV) PCR assays were developed to detect HPV DNA in samples collected for the efficacy determination of the quadrivalent HPV (type 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine (Gardasil). Additional multiplex (L1, E6, and E7 open reading frame [ORF]) or duplex (E6 and E7 ORF) HPV PCR assays were developed to detect high-risk HPV types, including HPV type 31 (HPV31), HPV33, HPV35, HPV39, HPV45, HPV51, HPV52, HPV56, HPV58, and HPV59. Here, we evaluated clinical specimen concordance and compared the limits of detection (LODs) between multiplex HPV PCR assays and the INNO-LiPA HPV Genotyping Extra assay, which detects 28 types, for the 14 HPV types common to both of these methods. Overall HPV detection agreement rates were >90% for swabs and >95% for thin sections. Statistically significant differences in detection were observed for HPV6, HPV16, HPV18, HPV35, HPV39, HPV45, HPV56, HPV58, and HPV59 in swabs and for HPV45, HPV58, and HPV59 in thin sections. Where P was <0.05, discordance was due to detection of more HPV-positive samples by the multiplex HPV PCR assays. LODs were similar for eight HPV types, significantly lower in multiplex assays for five HPV types, and lower in INNO-LiPA for HPV6 only. LODs were under 50 copies for all HPV types, with the exception of HPV39, HPV58, and HPV59 in the INNO-LiPA assay. The overall percent agreement for detection of 14 HPV types between the type-specific multiplex HPV PCR and INNO-LiPA genotyping assays was good. The differences in positive sample detection favored multiplex HPV PCR, suggesting increased sensitivity of HPV DNA detection by type-specific multiplex HPV PCR assays

Population-Level Effects of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Programs on Infections with Nonvaccine Genotypes

We analyzed human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalences during prevaccination and postvaccination periods to consider possible changes in nonvaccine HPV genotypes after introduction of vaccines that confer protection against 2 high-risk types, HPV16 and HPV18. Our meta-analysis included 9 studies with data for 13,886 girls and women ≤19 years of age and 23,340 women 20-24 years of age. We found evidence of cross-protection for HPV31 among the younger age group after vaccine introduction but little evidence for reductions of HPV33 and HPV45. For the group this same age group, we also found slight increases in 2 nonvaccine high-risk HPV types (HPV39 and HPV52) and in 2 possible high-risk types (HPV53 and HPV73). However, results between age groups and vaccines used were inconsistent, and the increases had possible alternative explanations; consequently, these data provided no clear evidence for type replacement. Continued monitoring of these HPV genotypes is important

MassARRAY Spectrometry Is More Sensitive than PreTect HPV-Proofer and Consensus PCR for Type-Specific Detection of High-Risk Oncogenic Human Papillomavirus Genotypes in Cervical Cancer▿

Type-specific detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) is indicated for better risk stratification and clinical management of women testing positive for HPV and for epidemiologic surveillance. MassARRAY spectrometry (MassARRAY; Sequenom) is a novel method for type-specific detection of 15 high-risk oncogenic HPV types: HPV-16, -18, -31, -33, -35, -39, -45, -51, -52, -56, -58, -59, -66, -68, and -73. PreTect HPV-Proofer (Proofer; Norchip) is a type-specific assay that detects E6/E7 mRNA from five high-risk oncogenic HPV types: HPV-16, -18, -31, -33, and -45. The performance of these tests for type-specific identification of HPV was assessed with cervical specimens from 192 cases of cervical cancer in comparison with consensus MY09/MY11 PCR followed by nucleotide sequencing (consensus PCR). The overall HPV detection rates were 94.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.7, 97.9), 83.3% (95% CI, 78.1, 88.5), and 86.5% (95% CI, 81.7, 91.3) for MassARRAY, Proofer, and consensus PCR, respectively. All tests were negative in six (3.1%) of the 192 cases. Considering only the specimens that contained at least one of the five types targeted by Proofer, the detection rates were 96.6%, 91.4%, and 86.9% for MassARRAY, Proofer, and consensus PCR, respectively. MassARRAY detected multiple infections in 14.1%, Proofer detected multiple infections in 3.6%, and consensus PCR failed to detect any multiple infections. The agreement was highest at 86.0% (kappa = 0.76) between MassARRAY and Proofer and lowest at 81.8% (kappa = 0.69) between Proofer and consensus PCR. In conclusion, MassARRAY is a highly sensitive and accurate method for type-specific detection of oncogenic HPV in cervical cancer, with Proofer showing impressive performance