It is time for universal HPV vaccination

Prue, Gilliam; Baker, Peter; Graham, Donna M.; Nutting, Chris; Greenhouse, Peter; Lawler, Mark

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31821-x

Cited by 35 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the approval of the first HPV vaccine in 2006, there has been an increasing body of evidence regarding the burden of HPVrelated cancers in men (18). In 2009, the Food and Drug Admin-istration (FDA) extended the approval of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine to also include boys and men.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The indications of the nonavalent HPV vaccine, first approved in 2014, were extended by including boys and men in 2015. Gender-neutral vaccination is an invaluable method for preventing HPV-related disease and is currently carried out in more than 20 countries, including Australia, Austria, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Israel, Italy, Liechtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States (18,19). Australia has been a pioneer with respect to implementing HPV vaccination-it was one of the first countries to introduce a national HPV vaccination program for girls and young women, and one of the most successful ones in sustaining high vaccination coverage rates among the target population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Municipally sponsored human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of boys in Slovenia: the first 4 years

Troha

Šterbenc

Mlaker³

et al. 2019

Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina Pannonica Et Adriatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Municipally sponsored human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of boys in Slovenia: the first 4 years

Troha

Šterbenc

Mlaker³

et al. 2019

Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina Pannonica Et Adriatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it includes only the money to be spent and any cost offsets, excludes non-monetary benefit [75], and tends to have a short evaluation period as it is focused on short-term budget spending. BIA therefore cannot be considered appropriate for a full economic assessment of new interventions where important cost-offsets will only appear many years after introduction, such as HPV and hepatitis B vaccines (HBV) [76]. Additional tools are needed for a complete evaluation.…”

Section: Budget-focused Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to assess for the full economic value of vaccines? From past to present, drawing lessons for the future

Standaert

Sauboin

DeAntonio³

et al. 2020

Journal of Market Access & Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is the economic analysis method most commonly applied today in the context of replacing one treatment with a new one in a developed healthcare system to improve efficiency. CEA is often requested by local healthcare decisionmakers to grant reimbursement.New preventative interventions, such as new vaccines, may however have much wider benefits inside and outside healthcare, when compared with treatment. These additional benefits include externalities on indirect clinical impact, reallocation of specific healthcare resources, improved quality of care, better productivity, better disease control, better fiscal revenues, and others. But these effects are sometimes difficult to integrate into a meaningful CEA result. They may appear as specific benefits for specific stakeholders, other than the stakeholders in healthcare.Objective: Based on a historical view about the application of economic assessments for vaccines our objective has been to make the inventory of who was/is interested in knowing the economic value of vaccines, in what those different stakeholders are likely to see the benefit from their perspective and how were/are we able to measure those benefits and to report them well. Results: The historical view disclosed a limited interest in the economic assessment of vaccines at start, more than 50 years ago, that was comparable to the assessment of looking for more efficiency in new industries through optimization exercises. Today, we are exposed to a very rich panoply of different stakeholders (n= 16). They have their specific interest in many different facets of the vaccine benefit of which some are well known in the conventional economic analysis (n=9), but most outcomes are hidden and not enough evaluated and reported (n=26). Meanwhile we discovered that many different methods of evaluation have been explored to facilitate the measurement and reporting of the benefits (n=18). Conclusion: Our recommendation for future economic evaluations of new vaccines is therefore to find the right combination among the three entities of stakeholder type selection, outcome measure of interest for each stakeholder, and the right method to apply. We present at the end examples that illustrate how successful this approach can be.

show abstract

“…Our ongoing efforts are to translate this DIAV microarray strategy to fight emerging infections and zoonoses [25][26][27] . As ever more vaccines are developed to prevent human diseases, e.g., human papillomavirus vaccines for cervical cancer 28 and enterovirus 71 vaccines for hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) 29 , there is an increasing demand for a DIV solution for humans. We noticed that the IgG serodynamics of most human vaccines have been developed based on data from protein/virus based assays [30][31][32] .…”

Section: Iggsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epitope containing short peptides capture distinct IgG serodynamics that enable DIVA for live-attenuated vaccines

Xue

Liu

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differentiating infected from vaccinated animals (DIVA) strategies have been central enabling techniques in several successful viral disease elimination programs. However, owing to their long and uncertain development process, no DIVA-compatible vaccines are available for many important diseases. We report herein a new DIVA strategy based on hybrid protein-peptide microarrays which can theoretically work with any vaccine. Leading from our findings from Peste des petits ruminants (PPR), we found 4 epitope containing short peptides (ECSPs) which have distinct IgG serodynamics: anti-ECSP IgGs only exist for 10-60 days post vaccination (dpv), while anti-protein IgGs remained at high levels for >1000 dpv. These data enabled design of a DIVA diagnostic microarray containing 4 ECSPs and 3 proteins, which unlike cELISA and VNT, enables ongoing monitoring of serological differences between vaccinated individuals and individuals exposed to the pathogen. For 50 samples after 60 dpv, 20 animals were detected with positive anti-ECSP IgGs, indicating recent infections in vaccinated goat/sheep herds. These DIVA diagnostic microarrays will almost certainly facilitate eradication programs for (re-)emerging pathogens and zoonoses.

show abstract

It is time for universal HPV vaccination

Cited by 35 publications

References 7 publications

Municipally sponsored human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of boys in Slovenia: the first 4 years

Municipally sponsored human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of boys in Slovenia: the first 4 years

How to assess for the full economic value of vaccines? From past to present, drawing lessons for the future

Epitope containing short peptides capture distinct IgG serodynamics that enable DIVA for live-attenuated vaccines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About