4.7 Review

Vaccination against HPV: boosting coverage and tackling misinformation

Journal

MOLECULAR ONCOLOGY
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 770-778

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/1878-0261.12808

Keywords

cervical cancer; coverage; HPV; misinformation; social media; vaccination

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health (Ricerca Corrente)
  2. Knaek Cancer
  3. Danish Health Authority

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Efforts to globally eliminate cervical cancer caused by HPV are underway, with high vaccination coverage being crucial. Successful public HPV vaccination programs in Italy and Denmark highlight the importance of overcoming challenges in maintaining recommended coverage levels.
The availability of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines and screening tests has raised the possibility of globally eliminating cervical cancer, which is caused by HPV. Cervical cancer is a very common malignancy worldwide, especially among deprived women. High vaccination coverage is key to the containment and eventual elimination of the infection. Public HPV vaccination programmes in Italy and Denmark were swiftly established and are among the most successful worldwide. Still, in both countries, it has been challenging to achieve and maintain the recommended coverage of > 80% in girls. In a well-studied Italian region, vaccination coverage in girls at age 15 years (World Health Organization's gold standard) reached 76% in 2015 but decreased to 69% in 2018, likely due to work overload in public immunization centres. In Denmark, doubts about safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccine generated a decline in coverage among girls age 12-17, from 80% in 2013 down to 37% in 2015, when remedial actions made it rise again. Insights from these two countries are shared to illustrate the importance of monitoring coverage in a digital vaccine registry and promptly reacting to misinformation about vaccination.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available