人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)疫苗预防HPV 16/18诱导的子宫颈癌及其前体。

Oliver Damm, Marc Nocon, Stephanie Roll, Christoph Vauth, Stefan Willich, Wolfgang Greiner
{"title":"人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)疫苗预防HPV 16/18诱导的子宫颈癌及其前体。","authors":"Oliver Damm,&nbsp;Marc Nocon,&nbsp;Stephanie Roll,&nbsp;Christoph Vauth,&nbsp;Stefan Willich,&nbsp;Wolfgang Greiner","doi":"10.3205/hta000066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Essential precondition for the development of cervical cancer is a persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. The majority - approximately 70% - of cervical carcinomas is caused by two high-risk HPV types (16 and 18). Recently, two vaccines have been approved to the German market with the potential to induce protection against HPV 16 and HPV 18 among additional low-risk virus types.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyse whether HPV vaccination is effective with regard to the reduction of cervical cancer and precursors of cervical carcinoma (CIN), respectively? Does HPV vaccination represent a cost-effective alternative or supplement to present screening practice? Are there any differences concerning cost-effectiveness between the two available vaccines? Should HPV vaccination be recommended from a health economic point of view? If so, which recommendations can be conveyed with respect to a (re)organization of the German vaccination strategy? Which ethical, social and legal implications have to be considered?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on a systematic literature review, randomized controlled trials (RCT) looking at the effectiveness of HPV vaccination for the prevention of cervical carcinoma and its precursors - cervical intraepithelial neoplasia - have been identified. In addition, health economic models were identified to address the health economic research questions. Quality assessment of medical and economic literature was assured by application of general assessment standards for the systematic and critical appraisal of scientific studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Vaccine efficacy in prevention of CIN 2 or higher lesions in HPV 16 or HPV 18 negative women, who received all vaccination doses, ranges between 98% and 100%. Side effects of the vaccination are mainly associated with injection site reactions (redness, turgor, pain). No significant differences concerning serious complications between the vaccination- and the placebo-groups were reported. Results of base case scenarios in the identified health economic modeling analyses range from approximately 3,000 Euro to 40,000 Euro per additional QALY (QALY = Quality-adjusted life year) and approximately 9,000 Euro to 65,000 Euro per additional life year (LYG), respectively.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The included studies show that both available HPV vaccines are effective in preventing HPV 16 and HPV 18 infections and probable resulting premalignant lesions of the cervix. However, the duration of protection is currently unclear. With regard to side effects, the vaccination can be considered as secure. Nevertheless, the number of cases within the clinical studies is not sufficient to determine the occurrence of rarely occurring (severe) adverse events in a reliable way. A reduction in the incidence and induced mortality through cervical cancer in Germany is not only depending on the vaccine's clinical efficacy. Effects of the new technology on the overall participation rate in screening programs and the resulting vaccination rate and immunization status are also important factors. The results of identified health economic models vary substantially due to the heterogeneity of methodological approaches as well as chosen input parameters. However, almost all model-based analyses reached the conclusion that the implementation of a vaccination with lifelong protection can be considered as cost-effective, if the present screening practice continues. A comparison of the two vaccines shows, that the cost effectiveness ratios are more favorable with the quadrivalent vaccine than with the bivalent alternative when considering QALY as primary outcome parameter. The reason for this finding might be that in the case of the quadrivalent vaccine the prevention of genital warts can also be incorporated into the analysis. Variations of the duration of protection as well as the discounting rate were identified as the primary influencing factors of cost-effectiveness results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementation of HPV vaccination might lead to a reduction of cervical cancer in immunized women. However, uptake of immunization should be accompanied by further studies in order to assess long-term effectiveness and safety aiming at an optimization of possible implementation processes. High numbers of participants are of particular importance regarding immunization. This has to be backed up by programs to optimize early detection - as this affects even those women who already underwent immunization. Since cost-effectiveness evidence might be significantly affected by the unclear duration of protective benefits, a final verdict on the vaccination's cost-effectiveness in the German setting is not possible. Hence, risk-sharing-agreements between third-party payers and manufacturers would pose an option to balance the consequences of uncertainty towards the duration of protection on cost-effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":89142,"journal":{"name":"GMS health technology assessment","volume":"5 ","pages":"Doc04"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/63/12/HTA-05-04.PMC3011291.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for the prevention of HPV 16/18 induced cervical cancer and its precursors.\",\"authors\":\"Oliver Damm,&nbsp;Marc Nocon,&nbsp;Stephanie Roll,&nbsp;Christoph Vauth,&nbsp;Stefan Willich,&nbsp;Wolfgang Greiner\",\"doi\":\"10.3205/hta000066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Essential precondition for the development of cervical cancer is a persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. The majority - approximately 70% - of cervical carcinomas is caused by two high-risk HPV types (16 and 18). Recently, two vaccines have been approved to the German market with the potential to induce protection against HPV 16 and HPV 18 among additional low-risk virus types.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyse whether HPV vaccination is effective with regard to the reduction of cervical cancer and precursors of cervical carcinoma (CIN), respectively? Does HPV vaccination represent a cost-effective alternative or supplement to present screening practice? Are there any differences concerning cost-effectiveness between the two available vaccines? Should HPV vaccination be recommended from a health economic point of view? If so, which recommendations can be conveyed with respect to a (re)organization of the German vaccination strategy? Which ethical, social and legal implications have to be considered?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on a systematic literature review, randomized controlled trials (RCT) looking at the effectiveness of HPV vaccination for the prevention of cervical carcinoma and its precursors - cervical intraepithelial neoplasia - have been identified. In addition, health economic models were identified to address the health economic research questions. Quality assessment of medical and economic literature was assured by application of general assessment standards for the systematic and critical appraisal of scientific studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Vaccine efficacy in prevention of CIN 2 or higher lesions in HPV 16 or HPV 18 negative women, who received all vaccination doses, ranges between 98% and 100%. Side effects of the vaccination are mainly associated with injection site reactions (redness, turgor, pain). No significant differences concerning serious complications between the vaccination- and the placebo-groups were reported. Results of base case scenarios in the identified health economic modeling analyses range from approximately 3,000 Euro to 40,000 Euro per additional QALY (QALY = Quality-adjusted life year) and approximately 9,000 Euro to 65,000 Euro per additional life year (LYG), respectively.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The included studies show that both available HPV vaccines are effective in preventing HPV 16 and HPV 18 infections and probable resulting premalignant lesions of the cervix. However, the duration of protection is currently unclear. With regard to side effects, the vaccination can be considered as secure. Nevertheless, the number of cases within the clinical studies is not sufficient to determine the occurrence of rarely occurring (severe) adverse events in a reliable way. A reduction in the incidence and induced mortality through cervical cancer in Germany is not only depending on the vaccine's clinical efficacy. Effects of the new technology on the overall participation rate in screening programs and the resulting vaccination rate and immunization status are also important factors. The results of identified health economic models vary substantially due to the heterogeneity of methodological approaches as well as chosen input parameters. However, almost all model-based analyses reached the conclusion that the implementation of a vaccination with lifelong protection can be considered as cost-effective, if the present screening practice continues. A comparison of the two vaccines shows, that the cost effectiveness ratios are more favorable with the quadrivalent vaccine than with the bivalent alternative when considering QALY as primary outcome parameter. The reason for this finding might be that in the case of the quadrivalent vaccine the prevention of genital warts can also be incorporated into the analysis. Variations of the duration of protection as well as the discounting rate were identified as the primary influencing factors of cost-effectiveness results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementation of HPV vaccination might lead to a reduction of cervical cancer in immunized women. However, uptake of immunization should be accompanied by further studies in order to assess long-term effectiveness and safety aiming at an optimization of possible implementation processes. High numbers of participants are of particular importance regarding immunization. This has to be backed up by programs to optimize early detection - as this affects even those women who already underwent immunization. Since cost-effectiveness evidence might be significantly affected by the unclear duration of protective benefits, a final verdict on the vaccination's cost-effectiveness in the German setting is not possible. Hence, risk-sharing-agreements between third-party payers and manufacturers would pose an option to balance the consequences of uncertainty towards the duration of protection on cost-effectiveness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":89142,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"GMS health technology assessment\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Doc04\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/63/12/HTA-05-04.PMC3011291.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"GMS health technology assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3205/hta000066\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/hta000066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

宫颈癌发展的必要前提是持续的人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)感染。大多数宫颈癌(约70%)是由两种高危型HPV(16型和18型)引起的。最近,两种疫苗已被批准进入德国市场,有可能在其他低风险病毒类型中诱导对HPV 16和HPV 18的保护。目的:分析HPV疫苗接种在分别减少宫颈癌和宫颈癌前体(CIN)方面是否有效?HPV疫苗接种是目前筛查实践的一种具有成本效益的替代或补充吗?两种现有疫苗在成本效益方面是否存在差异?从健康经济学的角度来看,应该推荐HPV疫苗接种吗?如果是这样,可以就德国疫苗接种战略的(重新)组织传达哪些建议?需要考虑哪些伦理、社会和法律影响?方法:基于系统的文献综述,随机对照试验(RCT)观察HPV疫苗接种预防宫颈癌及其前体-宫颈上皮内瘤变的有效性。此外,还确定了卫生经济模型,以解决卫生经济研究问题。医学和经济文献的质量评估是通过对科学研究进行系统和批判性评估的一般评估标准来保证的。结果:接种所有剂量的HPV 16或HPV 18阴性妇女预防CIN 2或更高级别病变的疫苗效力在98%至100%之间。接种疫苗的副作用主要与注射部位的反应(红肿、疼痛)有关。接种疫苗组和安慰剂组在严重并发症方面无显著差异。在确定的健康经济建模分析中,基本情况情景的结果分别为每增加一个质量调整生命年(QALY =质量调整生命年)约3,000欧元至40,000欧元,每增加一个生命年(LYG)约9,000欧元至65,000欧元。讨论:纳入的研究表明,两种可用的HPV疫苗都能有效预防HPV 16和HPV 18感染以及可能导致的子宫颈恶性病变。然而,保护期限目前尚不清楚。至于副作用,可以认为疫苗接种是安全的。然而,临床研究中的病例数量不足以以可靠的方式确定罕见(严重)不良事件的发生。在德国,宫颈癌发病率和死亡率的降低不仅取决于疫苗的临床疗效。新技术对筛查项目的总体参与率以及由此产生的疫苗接种率和免疫状况的影响也是重要因素。由于方法方法的异质性以及所选择的输入参数,确定的卫生经济模型的结果差异很大。然而,几乎所有基于模型的分析得出的结论是,如果目前的筛查做法继续下去,可以认为实施具有终身保护的疫苗接种具有成本效益。两种疫苗的比较表明,当将QALY作为主要结局参数时,四价疫苗的成本-效果比优于二价疫苗。这一发现的原因可能是,在四价疫苗的情况下,生殖器疣的预防也可以纳入分析。保护期和贴现率的变化是影响成本效益结果的主要因素。结论:实施HPV疫苗接种可降低接种妇女宫颈癌的发生率。然而,免疫接种应伴随着进一步的研究,以评估长期有效性和安全性,旨在优化可能的实施过程。高人数的参与者对免疫特别重要。这必须得到优化早期检测方案的支持,因为这甚至影响到那些已经接受免疫接种的妇女。由于成本效益证据可能受到保护效益持续时间不明确的重大影响,因此不可能对德国情况下疫苗接种的成本效益作出最终裁决。因此,第三方付款人和制造商之间的风险分担协议将提供一种选择,以平衡不确定性的后果与保护期限对成本效益的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for the prevention of HPV 16/18 induced cervical cancer and its precursors.

Introduction: Essential precondition for the development of cervical cancer is a persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. The majority - approximately 70% - of cervical carcinomas is caused by two high-risk HPV types (16 and 18). Recently, two vaccines have been approved to the German market with the potential to induce protection against HPV 16 and HPV 18 among additional low-risk virus types.

Objectives: To analyse whether HPV vaccination is effective with regard to the reduction of cervical cancer and precursors of cervical carcinoma (CIN), respectively? Does HPV vaccination represent a cost-effective alternative or supplement to present screening practice? Are there any differences concerning cost-effectiveness between the two available vaccines? Should HPV vaccination be recommended from a health economic point of view? If so, which recommendations can be conveyed with respect to a (re)organization of the German vaccination strategy? Which ethical, social and legal implications have to be considered?

Methods: Based on a systematic literature review, randomized controlled trials (RCT) looking at the effectiveness of HPV vaccination for the prevention of cervical carcinoma and its precursors - cervical intraepithelial neoplasia - have been identified. In addition, health economic models were identified to address the health economic research questions. Quality assessment of medical and economic literature was assured by application of general assessment standards for the systematic and critical appraisal of scientific studies.

Results: Vaccine efficacy in prevention of CIN 2 or higher lesions in HPV 16 or HPV 18 negative women, who received all vaccination doses, ranges between 98% and 100%. Side effects of the vaccination are mainly associated with injection site reactions (redness, turgor, pain). No significant differences concerning serious complications between the vaccination- and the placebo-groups were reported. Results of base case scenarios in the identified health economic modeling analyses range from approximately 3,000 Euro to 40,000 Euro per additional QALY (QALY = Quality-adjusted life year) and approximately 9,000 Euro to 65,000 Euro per additional life year (LYG), respectively.

Discussion: The included studies show that both available HPV vaccines are effective in preventing HPV 16 and HPV 18 infections and probable resulting premalignant lesions of the cervix. However, the duration of protection is currently unclear. With regard to side effects, the vaccination can be considered as secure. Nevertheless, the number of cases within the clinical studies is not sufficient to determine the occurrence of rarely occurring (severe) adverse events in a reliable way. A reduction in the incidence and induced mortality through cervical cancer in Germany is not only depending on the vaccine's clinical efficacy. Effects of the new technology on the overall participation rate in screening programs and the resulting vaccination rate and immunization status are also important factors. The results of identified health economic models vary substantially due to the heterogeneity of methodological approaches as well as chosen input parameters. However, almost all model-based analyses reached the conclusion that the implementation of a vaccination with lifelong protection can be considered as cost-effective, if the present screening practice continues. A comparison of the two vaccines shows, that the cost effectiveness ratios are more favorable with the quadrivalent vaccine than with the bivalent alternative when considering QALY as primary outcome parameter. The reason for this finding might be that in the case of the quadrivalent vaccine the prevention of genital warts can also be incorporated into the analysis. Variations of the duration of protection as well as the discounting rate were identified as the primary influencing factors of cost-effectiveness results.

Conclusion: Implementation of HPV vaccination might lead to a reduction of cervical cancer in immunized women. However, uptake of immunization should be accompanied by further studies in order to assess long-term effectiveness and safety aiming at an optimization of possible implementation processes. High numbers of participants are of particular importance regarding immunization. This has to be backed up by programs to optimize early detection - as this affects even those women who already underwent immunization. Since cost-effectiveness evidence might be significantly affected by the unclear duration of protective benefits, a final verdict on the vaccination's cost-effectiveness in the German setting is not possible. Hence, risk-sharing-agreements between third-party payers and manufacturers would pose an option to balance the consequences of uncertainty towards the duration of protection on cost-effectiveness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Variability in the prescription of drugs with uncertain effectiveness. The case of SYSADOA in the Basque Country. Q-SEA - a tool for quality assessment of ethics analyses conducted as part of health technology assessments. Effects of continuous and intermittent renal replacement therapies among adult patients with acute kidney injury. Telemedicine: The legal framework (or the lack of it) in Europe. Complex health care interventions: Characteristics relevant for ethical analysis in health technology assessment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1