Nosayaba Osazuwa-Peters

Human papillomavirus (HPV), HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancer, and HPV vaccine in the United States—Do we need a broader vaccine policy?

BACKGROUND Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) of global importance; it is the most prevalent STI in the United States, with strains causally linked to oropharyngeal and other cancers. Efforts to prevent HPV have been made to varying degrees by policies implemented by different state governments; however, HPV and associated oropharyngeal cancer continue to show increasing incidence rates in the US. DESIGN A narrative review based on search on SciVerse, PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, and EMBASE databases, as well as literature/documents from the World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Cancer Society, National Conference of State legislatures, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services relevant to HPV and HPV vaccine policy in the US. RESULTS Vaccination has proved to be a successful policy in the US, and an extant recommendation aimed at preventing HPV and associated cervical and other anogenital cancers is the routine use of HPV vaccines for males and females. However, HPV vaccines are presently not recommended for preventing oropharyngeal cancer, although they have been shown to be highly effective against the HPV strains that are most commonly found in the oropharynx. And while there is a history of successful vaccine mandate in the US with resulting decrease in occurrence of infectious diseases, implementing HPV vaccine mandate has proved to be very unpopular. CONCLUSIONS With emerging evidence of the efficacy of the use of the HPV vaccine in preventing oral-HPV, more focus should be put on extending HPV vaccine to present oral HPV infection and oropharyngeal cancer. Also, implementing a broader HPV vaccine policy that include mandating HPV vaccines as a school-entry requirement for both sexes may increase vaccine use in the US for the greater good of the public.

Sexual behavior, HPV knowledge, and association with head and neck cancer among a high-risk group

OBJECTIVES To understand knowledge of HPV, its association with head and neck cancer (HNC), and source of knowledge in a high-risk population. MATERIALS AND METHODS A cross-sectional survey was conducted among attendees at a Drag Racing event in East St. Louis in 2013. RESULTS Only 29.9% knew that HPV definitely increases the risk of developing HNC, 42.4% thought HPV was same as HIV, and only 25.1% received HPV information from a healthcare practitioner. Participants that thought number of sexual partners did not increase risk of developing HPV were more likely to have low knowledge scores (r=.74, p<.001). There were significant associations between HNC knowledge, number of sexual partners, age at initial coitus, and risk perception; and those who did not think having more sexual partner increases the chance of developing HPV infection were 33times more likely to have lower knowledge of the association between HPV and HNC (OR=33.27; 95% CI: 16.34, 67.74). CONCLUSIONS Knowledge of HPV and its association with head and neck cancer has significant gaps in this population, with a large number of the population accessing HPV information from sources other than a healthcare provider.

Competing causes of death in the head and neck cancer population.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES The increasing survivorship of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) comes with a risk of death from other causes, known as competing causes. The demographics of HNSCC are also evolving with increasing incidence of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) associated tumors. This study describes competing causes of death for the HNSCC population compared to the general population and identifies associated risk factors. METHODS Adult patients with first mucosal HNSCC (2004-2011) were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Result database. Competing causes of death were compared to reference populations using proportion of deaths and Standardized Mortality Ratios (SMR). A multivariable competing risk survival analysis yielded subdistribution hazard ratios (HR) for competing mortality. RESULTS Of 64,598 HNSCC patients, 24,602 (38.1%) were deceased including 7142 deaths (29.0%) from competing causes. The most common were cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and other cancers. All relative mortality rates were elevated, especially liver disease (SMR 38.7; 95% CI: 29.4-49.3), suicide (SMR 37.1; 95% CI: 26.1-48.6), and subsequent primary cancers (SMR 7.5; 95% CI: 6.78-8.32). Demographic and tumor factors independently increased risk of competing mortality, including age (HR per 5years 1.24; 95% CI: 1.22-1.25), sex (male HR 1.23; 95% CI: 1.16-1.32), race (Black HR 1.17; 95% CI: 1.09-1.26), insurance (uninsured HR 1.28; 95% CI: 1.09-1.50), and marital status (single HR 1.29; 95% CI: 1.21-1.37). CONCLUSION Nearly one in three HNSCC patients died from competing causes. When developing long term survivorship regimens for HNSCC patients, clinicians should be familiar with this populations specific risks.

Predictors of stage at presentation and outcomes of head and neck cancers in a university hospital setting.

To increase early detection of head and neck cancers, it is important that disparities associated with access to care are addressed.

Suicide: A Major Threat to Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship

TO THE EDITOR: The article by Ringash that was recently published in Journal of Clinical Oncology provided a compelling narrative of both the improvements made in head and neck cancer survivorship, as well as the challenges created by longer-term treatment and associated toxicities. There are currently at least 280,000 head and neck cancer survivors in the United States. As the article by Ringash stated, the upturn in head and neck cancer survivorship in the last three decades has coincided with the emergence of human papilloma virus-positive oropharyngeal cancer, as well as a decrease in tobacco use in the general population. These make it a challenge to isolate survival gains as a function of improved therapy from the natural prognostic value of a diagnosis of human papilloma virus-positive oropharyngeal cancer. Whatever the case, the fact that more than one-quarter million Americans are currently alive after a diagnosis of head and neck cancer means there needs to be a more deliberate effort in longer-term management of treatment-related toxicities, some of which are lifelong. We agree with Ringash’s conclusion that new models of care need to be developed in response to the significant quality-of-life issues faced by patients with head and neck cancer. The Institute of Medicine publication From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, also cited by Ringash, called for a clear individualized survivorship plan for cancer patients. There is a serious need for this model to be implemented universally in head and neck cancer management. Although we agree with Ringash that patients with head and neck cancer face competing mortality risks from second primary cancers and other noncancers, what we found lacking was recognition of an important competing cause of mortality in head and neck cancer survivors: suicide. Suicide associated with head and neck cancer is not just a competing cause of death; it is also a quality-of-life issue. Many authors agree that head and neck cancer is among the top cancer sites associated with suicide. One national study of 1.3 million cancer patients even found that head and neck cancer carried the highest risk of suicide among cancer survivors. As a quality-of-life issue as well as a competing cause of death, the elevated risk of head and neck cancer-related suicide, although it peaks during the first few years after diagnosis, remains virtually throughout the course of the cancer survivor’s life. Additionally, some other wellknown quality-of-life issues associated with head and neck cancer (eg, pain, disability, esthetic compromise and body image issues, psychosocial function, anxiety, emotional distress, and depression) are all associated with suicide. Therefore, it is difficult to have a discussion of quality-of-life interventions in head and neck cancer without addressing the issue of suicide. Thus, we believe that suicide in patients with head and neck cancer should be addressed as a major threat to cancer survivorship. Cardiovascular disease, for example, is a known competing cause of death among patients with head and neck cancer, and is listed in Figure 4 of Ringash’s article. Cardiovascular disease may be managed for a long time; however, when a cancer patient decides that he/she is “better off dead,” a finality, or terminality, is invoked. This is quite unique to suicide compared with other competing causes of death. Thus, in the urgent call for “new strategies and models of care to better address quality-of-life issues and meet the needs of survivors of head and neck cancer,” we believe it is pertinent that suicide is recognized as an important threat to head and neck cancer survivorship.

Not just a woman's business! Understanding men and women's knowledge of HPV, the HPV vaccine, and HPV-associated cancers

Few studies have included men when assessing differences in knowledge about HPV, and HPV-associated cancers. We examined gender differences in knowledge about HPV, HPV vaccine, and HPV-associated cancers. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyze data of 3,677 survey respondents aged 18 years and older from the 2014 Health Information National Trends Survey. Covariates included age, race/ethnicity, marital status, education, income level, regular provider, general health, internet use, and family structure aged 9 to 27 years. Analyses were conducted in 2015. Sixty-four percent of respondents had heard of HPV and the HPV vaccine. Seventy-eight percent of respondents knew HPV causes cervical cancer, but only 29% knew it causes penile cancer, 26% knew it causes anal cancer, and 30% knew it causes oral cancer. In multivariable analyses, males were less likely to have heard of HPV (aOR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.25-0.45), and less likely to have heard of the HPV vaccine (aOR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.18-0.32) compared to females. No differences existed between males and females regarding knowledge about HPV-associated cancers. In conclusion, knowledge of HPV, the vaccine, and HPV-associated cancers in both males and females in the United States remains very low, especially among men.

40-year incidence trends for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma in the United States

OBJECTIVES To determine differences in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) incidence between 1975 and 2014 stratified by race, sex, and age. MATERIALS AND METHODS We obtained age-adjusted OPSCC incidence rates for race and sex groups from 1975 to 2014 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 9 database. We defined OPSCC as cancers of the base of tongue, lingual/palatine tonsil, oropharynx, soft palate, uvula, and Waldeyers ring. We used Joinpoint analyses to determine incidence trends for race/sex/age groupings. RESULTS There were 38,624 oropharyngeal primary tumors in the analyses. Males accounted for 74% of sample population, and whites accounted for 84% of tumors. Overall, there was a 57.3% increase in incidence of oropharyngeal between 1975 and 2014. For blacks and whites, average incidence was lower for females than males. Rates for black males aged ≥50years was highest for most of the follow-up time but decreased sharply around 1988 and were surpassed by the significant increase in incidence in white males aged 50-59 (1995-2014 APC=4.07, p<0.001) and ≥60years (2002-2014 APC=4.25, p<0.001). For males aged ≥60, whites had higher rates than blacks starting in 2010. OPSCC incidence in White males (10.99 per 100,000 person-years) surpassed rates in Blacks (10.14 per 100,000 person-years) beginning in 2008. CONCLUSION OPSCC has significantly increased in the United States in the last 40 years. This overall increase in OPSCC can primarily be attributed to white males. OPSCC prevention and early detection efforts could target these demographic factors to decrease rising OPSCC incidence.

A Comparison of Parent- and Provider-Reported Human Papillomavirus Vaccination of Adolescents

INTRODUCTION There is considerable effort at the state and national levels to monitor human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake and understand the factors that influence who gets vaccinated. Accurate measurement of vaccination coverage is critical for monitoring HPV vaccination. This study aimed to determine comparability between parent- and provider-reported HPV vaccination status for a sample of adolescents in the U.S. METHODS Data from the 2014 National Immunization Survey-Teen were analyzed in 2016 for 20,827 adolescents. Information on HPV vaccine uptake (initiation [one or more dose] and completion [three or more doses]) was obtained using parental (recall) and provider reports (electronic medical records). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and κ-coefficient were computed to determine how comparable parental and provider (ref group) reports were for HPV vaccination. RESULTS Prevalence of HPV vaccine initiation was comparable between parental and provider report (51.3% vs 50.0%) and for completion (30.7% vs 27.3%). Compared with provider report, parent-reported HPV vaccine initiation had high sensitivity (86.0%), specificity (87.4%), PPV (87.5%), NPV (85.9%), and acceptable κ-coefficient (0.73). Compared with provider report, parent-reported HPV vaccine completion had a sensitivity of 71.5%, specificity of 91.1%, PPV of 78.5%, NPV of 87.6%, and κ-coefficient of 0.64. Similar characteristics-adolescent age, sex, number of doctor visits, and region-were associated with HPV vaccine uptake using parental and provider reports. CONCLUSIONS Parental recall is comparable to provider report in monitoring HPV vaccine uptake for adolescents, although parental recall is less comparable for HPV vaccine completion.

Association Between Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Survival, Smoking at Diagnosis, and Marital Status

Importance While the adverse association between smoking and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) survival has been well described, there are also inconclusive studies and those that report no significant changes in HNSCC survival and overall mortality due to smoking. There is also a lack of studies investigating the association of marital status on smoking status at diagnosis for patients with HNSCC. Objective To examine the association between patient smoking status at HNSCC diagnosis and survival and the association between marital status and smoking in these patients. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective cohort study was conducted by querying the Saint Louis University Hospital Tumor Registry for adults with a diagnosis of HNSCC and treated at the university academic medical center between 1997 and 2012; 463 confirmed cases were analyzed. Main Outcomes and Measures Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to evaluate association of survival with smoking status at diagnosis and covariates. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to assess whether marital status was associated with smoking at diagnosis adjusting for covariates. Results Of the 463 total patients (338 men, 125 women), 92 (19.9%) were aged 18 to 49 years; 233 (50.3%) were aged 50 to 65 years; and 138 (29.8%) were older than 65 years. Overall, 56.2% of patients were smokers at diagnosis (n = 260); 49.6% were married (n = 228); and the mortality rate was 54.9% (254 died). A majority of patients were white (81.0%; n = 375). Smokers at diagnosis were more likely to be younger (ie, <65 years), unmarried, and to drink alcohol. We found a statistically significant difference in median survival time between smokers (89 months; 95% CI, 65-123 months) and nonsmokers at diagnosis (208 months; 95% CI, 129-235 months). In the adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, patients who were smokers at diagnosis were almost twice as likely to die during the study period as nonsmokers (hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.42-2.77). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, unmarried patients were 76% more likely to use tobacco than married patients (adjusted odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.08-2.84). Conclusions and Relevance Smokers were almost twice as likely as nonsmokers to die during the study period. We also found that those who were married were less likely to be smokers at diagnosis. Our study suggests that individualized cancer care should incorporate social support and management of cancer risk behaviors.

Impact of treatment modality on quality of life of head and neck cancer patients: Findings from an academic medical institution

PURPOSE The objective of this pilot study was to determine how different treatment modalities (surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy) impact quality of life (QOL) in a population of head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. METHODS Fifty-nine newly diagnosed, biopsy-confirmed HNC patients were recruited between 2007-2012. They completed the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire and Head & Neck Module at 5 intervals pre- and post-treatment. Participants were grouped into four categories based on modality: surgery only, surgery/radiation, chemoradiation, or surgery/chemoradiation. Repeated measures ANOVA examined effect of treatment modality on QOL over time. RESULTS Xerostomia symptoms were significantly associated with chemoradiation (F(2.47, 59.27)=3.57, p=0.03), lowest at pretreatment and highest 6 months post-treatment. Time was significantly associated with head and neck pain, F(2.95,67.89)=3.39, p=0.02. CONCLUSIONS HNC survivors exhibit different QOL related symptoms depending on combined treatment modalities, and time post-treatment. It is important to understand QOL differences based upon treatment modalities when developing treatment plans for HNC patients.