Objectives Individuals treated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) are at long-term risk of persistent or recurrent disease despite treatment. This committee opinion aims to summarize and provide evidence-based recommendations for adjuvant human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination based on available, published literature. Methods A task force from the ASCCP Practice Committee reviewed current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines and previously published literature about the role of adjuvant HPV vaccination in previously unvaccinated individuals undergoing treatment for CIN2+ and other HPV-related diseases. Results Current CDC guidelines recommend routine or catch-up HPV vaccination for individuals aged 9 to 26 years, and shared decision making regarding vaccination for individuals aged 27 to 45 years. Multiple published studies suggest a possible benefit for adjuvant HPV vaccination in previously unvaccinated individuals undergoing treatment for CIN2+. Conclusions The American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology recommends adherence to current CDC recommendations for vaccination of individuals aged 9 to 26 years and consideration of the possible benefit of adjuvant HPV vaccination during shared decision making for previously unvaccinated individuals aged 27 to 45 years who are undergoing treatment for CIN2+.

Before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, achievements in childhood vaccine coverage in the USA and globally appeared imperiled. Misinformation about vaccines was pervasive.1 Vaccine hesitancy––a motivational state of being conflicted about, or opposed to, vaccination––was a top ten global health threat.2 And vaccine-preventable diseases, such as measles, re-emerged following decades of successful control.3 Since the arrival of COVID-19, disruptions to childhood vaccine delivery have further jeopardised childhood vaccination efforts.4

Objectives: Women living with HIV (WLWH) have a greater risk of anal cancer than women without HIV; however, there are limited studies that examine awareness of anal cancer risk among WLWH and "high-risk"HIV-negative women. This study examines risk factors for anal cancer, perceptions of risk for anal cancer, and perceptions of anal cancer screening among a cohort of WLWH and high-risk HIV-negative women. Materials and Methods: From the Atlanta, GA, and Bronx, NY, sites of the Women's Interagency HIV Study, 155 WLWH and HIV-negative women were enrolled and the Champion Health Belief Model Scale questionnaire measuring risk perceptions to anal cancer was administered to each participant. Results: The WLWH perceived anal cancer to be less serious and perceived facing fewer barriers to anal cancer screening than HIV-negative women (both p =.01). Older women (≥50 years) felt that they had less barriers to anal cancer screening (p =.047). Moreover, women who had less than a high school education felt more susceptible to anal cancer (p =.001), as did women who reported a history of anal intercourse (p =.017). Conclusions: Despite being at an increased risk for anal cancer, perceptions of susceptibility to anal cancer and seriousness of anal cancer were low among WLWH. These findings highlight opportunities for provider and patient educational interventions to improve awareness of anal cancer risk among WLWH.

None

Infection by human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16, the most oncogenic HPV type, was found to be the least affected by HIV-status and CD4 count of any of the approximately 13 oncogenic HPV types. This relative independence from host immune status has been interpreted as evidence that HPV16 may have an innate ability to avoid the effects of immunosurveillance. However, the impact of immune status on other individual HPV types has not been carefully assessed. We studied type-specific HPV infection in a cohort of 2,470 HIV-positive (HIV[+]) and 895 HIV-negative (HIV[−]) women. Semi-annually collected cervicovaginal lavages were tested for >40 HPV types. HPV type-specific prevalence ratios (PRs), incidence and clearance hazard ratios (HRs), were calculated by contrasting HPV types detected in HIV[+] women with CD4 < 200 to HIV[−] women. HPV71 and HPV16 prevalence had the weakest associations with HIV-status/CD4 count of any HPV, according to PRs. No correlations between PRs and HPV phylogeny or oncogenicity were observed. Instead, higher HPV type-specific prevalence in HIV[−] women correlated with lower PRs (ρ = −0.59; p = 0.0001). An alternative (quadratic model) statistical approach (PHIV+ = a*PHIV− + b*PHIV−2; R2 = 0.894) found similar associations (p = 0.0005). In summary, the most prevalent HPV types in HIV[−] women were the types most independent from host immune status. These results suggest that common HPV types in HIV[−] women may have a greater ability to avoid immune surveillance than other types, which may help explain why they are common.

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) experience disproportionately high burdens of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV)-associated anal cancers. Recent focus has shifted to anorectal cancer prevention through high-resolution anoscopy (HRA); however, little is known about sexual minority men’s perceptions, attitudes, or beliefs regarding HRA. We conducted 4 qualitative Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) (n = 15) with sexual minority men, focusing on their beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions of undergoing HRA. Participants discussed their experiences of HPV/HRA as influenced by both their gender and sexuality, including unawareness of HPV disease as a male health issue, challenges relating to female-oriented HPV/HRA language, conception of HPV/HRA as related to prostate health, and connecting their sexual behavior identification as “bottoms” to their need for HRA. As efforts to improve HRA knowledge, access, and uptake among sexual and gender minority communities increase, special attention should be paid to language and messaging choices around HRA.

Many high-income countries have rapidly pivoted from hard decisions about who may receive COVID-19 vaccines, due to shortages, to equally hard decisions about who must receive them. As lasting containment of COVID-19 remains elusive, many nations—from Costa Rica, to Austria, to Turkmenistan—are turning to vaccination mandates of various kinds.1 Mandates, however, are controversial in many countries. Austria's proposed mandate for adults, for example, provoked mass protests. Some objectors argue mandates represent undue encroachment on individual liberty. Some other objectors maintain that mandates will not be an effective policy for COVID-19 because many individuals will seek to evade them, and mandates might erode support for other public health measures such as mask wearing.

As coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccine uptake plateaued in mid-2021, many countries began to experiment with incentives. The impact of the resulting patchwork of incentive programs is largely unknown. Rewards research on other health behaviors suggests that incentives for vaccination will be most effective when 3 criteria are met: (1) their receipt is certain, (2) they are delivered immediately, and (3) recipients value them (Table 1).1 Our commentary uses these criteria to highlight vaccination incentive programs most likely to have impact.

The incidence of anal cancer in HIV-positive women is a growing public health concern where they have a 7.8-fold increased risk for anal cancer than women in the general population. We examined knowledge of anal cancer, anal cancer screening, and HPV in HIV-positive women and high-risk HIV-negative women. Women were recruited from the Women’s Interagency HIV Study and completed an adapted Knowledge of Anal Cancer and HPV Scale. Correlations among anal cancer knowledge and sociodemographic and risk factors were assessed using Pearson’s or Spearman’s rho r test. Student’s t test or chi-square tests identified significant differences between groups by HIV status or risk factors. Among 155 women, 72% (n = 113) correctly identified the purpose of an anal Pap test. However, only 42% (n = 65) identified HIV as a risk factor for anal cancer. HIV-positive women were more knowledgeable about anal cancer than high risk HIV-negative women (t = 2.104, p =.037). Women with a history of an abnormal cervical Pap test (t = 2.137, p =.034), younger age (t = 3.716, p =.000), reported history of anal sex (t = 3.284, p =.001), some college education or higher (t = −2.005, p =.047), and non-smokers (t = 2.425, p =.016) were significantly more knowledgeable about HPV. Although most women were knowledgeable about anal cancer, many women could not identify important risk factors for anal cancer, such as HIV infection. Patient educational interventions tailored to HIV-positive women are warranted to improve knowledge and awareness of risk for anal cancer.

Since the first case of COVID-19 was identified in the USA in January, 2020, over 46 million people in the country have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several COVID-19 vaccines have received emergency use authorisations from the US Food and Drug Administration, with the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine receiving full approval on Aug 23, 2021. When paired with masking, physical distancing, and ventilation, COVID-19 vaccines are the best intervention to sustainably control the pandemic. However, surveys have consistently found that a sizeable minority of US residents do not plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine. The most severe consequence of an inadequate uptake of COVID-19 vaccines has been sustained community transmission (including of the delta [B.1.617.2] variant, a surge of which began in July, 2021). Exacerbating the direct impact of the virus, a low uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will prolong the social and economic repercussions of the pandemic on families and communities, especially low-income and minority ethnic groups, into 2022, or even longer. The scale and challenges of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign are unprecedented. Therefore, through a series of recommendations, we present a coordinated, evidence-based education, communication, and behavioural intervention strategy that is likely to improve the success of COVID-19 vaccine programmes across the USA.