Investigator
Aalborg University Hospital
Human papillomavirus prevalence in first, second and third cervical cell samples from women HPV-vaccinated as girls, Denmark, 2017 to 2024: data from the Trial23 cohort study
BACKGROUND Danish women vaccinated with the 4-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine (HPV types: 6/11/16/18) at age 14 in 2008 reached screening age in 2017, allowing assessment of long-term effects on prevalence, persistence and incidence of HPV infections. AIM To examine the HPV status of cervical samples over time among women vaccinated as girls. METHODS Between February 2017 and February 2024, residual material from cytology-analysed samples collected through the ‘Trial23’ study, part of the national screening programme, was tested for HPV16/18 and non-vaccine high-risk (HR) HPV types. Prevalence in first, second and third samples, and persistence and incidence between samples were calculated. RESULTS Over 7 years, 8,659 women provided at least one sample, 5,835 at least two and 2,461 at least three. In 7,800 vaccinated women, HPV16/18 prevalence was 0.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2–0.5), 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1–0.4) and 0.2% (95% CI: 0.0–0.4) in three consecutive samples. Prevalence of non-vaccine HR HPV was 32% (95% CI: 31–33), 28% (95% CI: 27–29) and 31% (95% CI: 29–33). Persistence of HPV16/18 and non-vaccine HPV among vaccinated women was 40% and 53%. In adjusted analyses comparing vaccinated vs unvaccinated women, incidence was significantly lower for HPV16/18 (adjusted relative risk (aRR) < 0.10) while incidence of non-vaccine HR HPV types was higher (aRR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.12–2.45). No significant difference was observed for persistence. CONCLUSION Our study provides real-world evidence of stable protection against HPV16/18 infections in women vaccinated as girls. Less intensive screening seems reasonable until women vaccinated with the 9-valent vaccine reach screening age, when screening should be reconsidered.
Cervical cancer incidence in Denmark: Disentangling determinants of time trend
AbstractCervical cancer is a preventable disease. Nevertheless, stagnation has been seen in incidence rates also in countries with well‐functioning healthcare. On this basis, we investigated associations between control interventions and changes in cervical cancer incidence in Denmark from 2009 to 2022. Data on human papillomavirus (HPV)‐vaccination were retrieved from Staten's Serum Institute; on screening recommendations from Danish Health Authority, on screening performance from Danish Quality Database for Cervical Screening; and on cervical cancer incidence from Nordcan and Danish Cancer Register. We reported coverage with HPV vaccination (1+ dose); coverage with cervical cell samples; number of women with primary HPV tests; proportion of non‐normal cell samples without timely follow‐up; number of conizations; and cervical cancer incidence rates. In 2022, all women aged ≤29 had been offered childhood HPV vaccination with coverage of 80%–90%. By 2020–2022, the cervical cancer incidence rate in women aged 20–29 was 3 per 100,000; at level of disease elimination. In 2017, women aged 70+ were offered a one‐time HPV screening, and by 2020–2022, the old‐age peak in cervical cancer incidence had largely disappeared. From 2009 to 2022, proportion of non‐normal cell samples without timely follow‐up decreased from 20% to 10%, and conventional cytology was largely replaced by SurePath liquid‐based cytology; these factors could explain the steady decrease in cervical cancer incidence rate. Implementation of primary HPV screening in women aged 30–59 in 2021 was reflected in a, probably temporary, increase in the 2022 cervical cancer incidence rate. In conclusion, combined interventions with childhood HPV vaccination; one‐time HPV screening of elderly women; and better management of screening broke previous stagnation in cervical cancer incidence rate.
A walk‐in clinic as an alternative approach to reaching non‐attenders of the cervical cancer screening program in the North Denmark region—a pilot study
AbstractIntroductionUp to 39% of women in Denmark do not participate regularly in the cervical cancer screening program and initiatives to increase participation are called upon. The primary aim of this study was to describe previous screening history and characteristics of women attending screening in a walk‐in clinic. Furthermore, we wanted to investigate barriers to cervical cancer screening.Material and methodsWe designed a walk‐in clinic that was open 2 days a week from 16.00 to 19.00 h, located in the Departments of Gynecology in the two main hospitals of the North Denmark Region. The main purpose of the clinic was cervical cancer screening and the study period was 5 months. Women who were not eligible for screening or had other health complaints were referred to their general practitioner. The women included in the study, filled out a questionnaire regarding educational and occupational status; their screening history was registered using data from the Danish Pathology Register.ResultsDuring the study period, 255 women visited the walk‐in clinic. The final study population consisted of 249 women who met the inclusion criteria. Age range of participants was 23–77 years, with a median age of 45 years. The majority of the participants were currently employed (81%) or students (10%), the remaining being retired (5%) or unemployed (4%). Screening history showed that 138 (55.4%) of the women were on time for the screening or delayed less than 6 months compared to their recommended screening interval. Sixty‐one women (24.5%) were delayed >6 months but <2 years. Fifty women (20.1%) were classified as non‐attenders, with more than a 2‐year delay in their screening. In the group of non‐attenders, eight women had never been screened. Of the remaining 42 women, the median time since last screening was 8.2 years (range 5.0–25.3 years).ConclusionsWomen attending the walk‐in clinic tended to be primarily actively working or students (91%). All age groups in the screening population were represented. Screening history showed that 44.6% had not followed the recommended screening program.
