You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 30, Issue 6
  • Prophylactic human papillomavirus vaccination to prevent recurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a meta-analysis

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original research
Prophylactic human papillomavirus vaccination to prevent recurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a meta-analysis
  1. Helena C Bartels1,
  2. James Postle1,
  3. Ailin C Rogers2 and
  4. Donal Brennan1,3
  1. 1 Ireland East Hospital Gynaeoncology Group, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
  2. 2 Department of Surgery, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
  3. 3 School Of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Dr Helena C Bartels, Ireland East Hospital Gynaeoncology Group, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin 7, D07 R2WY, Ireland; helenabartels91{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Objective The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review evidence supporting the use of prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines to influence the risk of recurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after surgical treatment.

Methods A systematic literature search was performed for publications reporting risk of recurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after surgical treatment in patients receiving HPV vaccination (either in the prophylactic or adjuvant setting). Comprehensive searches of six electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and references of identified studies) from their inceptions were performed (English language only), and hand search reference lists were performed. Two independent reviewers applied inclusion and exclusion criteria to select manuscripts, with differences discussed and agreed by consensus. The literature search was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Results were reported as mean differences or pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

Results A total of 5744 citations were reviewed; 5 studies comprising 2912 patients were selected for the analysis. There were 1338 patients in the vaccinated group and 1574 in the placebo or unvaccinated group. The incidence of histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ was reduced in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated group (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21–0.54, p=< 0.00001). The number needed to treat to prevent one recurrence was 27. Both pre-treatment vaccination (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21–0.78, p=0.007, number needed to treat – 37) and adjuvant vaccination (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14–0.56, p=0.0003, number needed to treat – 30) reduced recurrence rates.

Conclusion Prophylactic or adjuvant HPV vaccination reduces the risk of recurrent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+. These data support further investigation of its role as an adjuvant to surgical treatment.

  • surgical oncology
  • uterine cervical neoplasms

https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2020-001197

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • HCB and JP contributed equally.

    • Correction notice Since the online publication of this article, the authors have noticed that the total number of patients was incorrectly stated as 3562. The correct number is 2912. This has led to changes in the abstract and results section, Table 1, Figures 3 and 4 and the supplementary appendix.

    • Contributors All named authors contributed to the manuscript.

    • Funding This research was funded by the Mater Private Hospital and the National Maternity Hospital Foundation. All authors who contributed to the manuscript are named authors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data availability statement Data are available in a public, open access repository. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. The data presented in this paper are a meta-analysis of data already published and available at the references listed within the manuscript.