Human papillomavirus vaccination history and diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade ≥2 severe lesions among a cohort of women who underwent colposcopy in Kaiser Permanente Southern California.

BACKGROUND

The risk of a high-grade lesion in women undergoing colposcopy following an abnormal screening result may be different by human papillomavirus vaccination status, because women who are vaccinated are presumably less likely to harbor human papillomavirus types 16 and 18.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate whether the risk of high-grade cervical lesion diagnosed through colposcopy is lower in women with human papillomavirus vaccination than in women without vaccination referred to colposcopy based on equal abnormal screening findings.

STUDY

DESIGN

Kaiser Permanente Orange County female patients between ages 21 and 38 years were included following an abnormal screening if they had ≥1 colposcopies between July 2017 and August 2018 and had at least 1 pathology diagnosis from the colposcopy visits. Data on demographic characteristics, clinical and sexual histories, and human papillomavirus vaccination were collected using a colposcopy registry smart form and from electronic medical records. Human papillomavirus genotyping was performed for tissues from confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ diagnoses. A multilevel generalized linear model with a logic function was used to evaluate the association between human papillomavirus vaccination history and the outcome of a cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ diagnosis and for human papillomavirus type 16- or 18-positive cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ as an alternative outcome, adjusting for screening results and potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of 730 women included in the study, 170 had a histologic diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ (23.2%). Moreover, 68 cases (40.0%) were histologically human papillomavirus type 16 and/or 18 positive. Of the 730 women, 311 (43%) were vaccinated for the human papillomavirus before colposcopy. Most women (206 [66.2%]) with human papillomavirus vaccination received the vaccine between the ages 18 and 26 years. A history of human papillomavirus vaccination overall, before sexual debut, before the age of 18 years, or with complete dosing was not associated with lower odds of a cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ diagnosis (odds ratio, 1.07 [95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.64]; odds ratio, 1.11 [95% confidence interval, 0.55-2.24]; odds ratio, 0.96 [95% confidence interval, 0.49-1.91]; and odds ratio, 0.84 [95% confidence interval, 0.53-1.35], respectively, in reference to no vaccination). Human papillomavirus vaccination history was not significantly associated with the odds of a human papillomavirus type 16- or 18-positive cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ diagnosis (P=.45). Notably, 8 cases (4.8% of all cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ cases) showed a human papillomavirus type 16 on a cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ histologic polymerase chain reaction analysis despite reported or documented human papillomavirus vaccination before sexual debut, including 2 cases who started vaccination before the age of 13 years.

CONCLUSION

Our study did not support modifying the colposcopy management guidelines for abnormal screening results for women with human papillomavirus vaccination, especially those vaccinated in the catch-up age range. Our findings on the 8 cases of human papillomavirus 16-positive cervical intraepithelial neoplasm grade 2+ vaccination before sexual debut suggested that lowering the recommended age for human papillomavirus vaccination may have additional benefits for preventing human papillomavirus infection that could occur early in life in some women.