Predicting the effect of successful human papillomavirus vaccination on existing cervical cancer prevention programs in the United States§††

Authors

  • Philip E. Castle PhD, MPH,

    1. Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Diane Solomon MD,

    Corresponding author
    1. Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland
    • Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, EPN Room 2130; 6130 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852;
    Search for more papers by this author
    • Fax: (301) 480-9939.

  • Debbie Saslow PhD,

    1. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Mark Schiffman MD, MPH

    1. Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland
    Search for more papers by this author

  • A National Cancer Institute (NCI)-sponsored clinical trial of the GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) human papillomavirus vaccine receives vaccine from the manufacturer (GSK) at no cost. GSK also provides support for aspects of the trial associated with regulatory submission needs to the US Federal Drug Administration.

  • The following companies have provided research support in the form of equipment or supplies at reduced or no cost for NCI-sponsored trials: Cytyc Corporation, Digene Corporation, GSK, TriPath, and Roche Molecular Systems. The work was supported (in part) by the Intramural Research Program of the NCI, National Institutes of Health (NIH).

  • §

    The authors have no personal financial conflict of interest to report. The financial activities of the NCI authors are monitored by the NCI Ethics Office.

  • The views and opinions within are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the NCI, the NIH, the Department of Health and Human Services of the US government, or any professional or clinical society.

  • The opinions or views expressed in this supplement are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or recommendations of the journal editors, the American Cancer Society, Wiley-Blackwell, or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

  • ††

    This is a US government work and, as such, is in the public domain in the United States of America.

Abstract

The development of a prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine that potentially may eliminate a majority of cervical cancers is a landmark in cancer prevention. Cervical screening, however, will continue to play an important role for the foreseeable future. Maintaining screening at the same intensity and simply adding on the expense of vaccination would result in redundancy of prevention efforts at enormously increased costs without necessarily further reducing cervical cancer mortality. Effectively integrating vaccination and screening efforts will be a critical and evolving challenge over the next decade; this will require understanding not only the impact of vaccination on reducing cervical abnormalities but also the influence of vaccination on screening test performance. Cancer 2008;113:(10 suppl):3031–5. Published 2008 by the American Cancer Society.

Ancillary