Estimating the effect of HIV on cervical cancer elimination in South Africa: Comparative modelling of the impact of vaccination and screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched its initiative to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To inform global efforts for countries with high HIV and cervical cancer burden, we assessed the impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and cervical cancer screening and treatment in South Africa, on cervical cancer and the potential for achieving elimination before 2120, considering faster HPV disease progression and higher cervical cancer risk among women living with HIV(WLHIV) and HIV interventions. Methods: Three independent transmission-dynamic models simulating HIV and HPV infections and disease progression were used to predict the impact on cervical cancer incidence of three scenarios for all women: 1) girls' vaccination (9-14 years old), 2) girls' vaccination plus 1 lifetime cervical screen (at 35 years), and 3) girls' vaccination plus 2 lifetime cervical screens (at 35 and 45 years) and three enhanced scenarios for WLHIV: 4) vaccination of young WLHIV aged 15-24 years, 5) three-yearly cervical screening of WLHIV aged 15-49 years, or 6) both. Vaccination assumed 90% coverage and 100% lifetime protection with the nonavalent vaccine (against HPV-16/18/31/33/45/52/58). Cervical cancer screening assumed HPV testing with uptake increasing from 45% (2023), 70% (2030) to 90% (2045+). We also assumed that UNAIDS 90-90-90 HIV treatment and 70% male circumcision targets are reached by 2030. We examined three elimination thresholds: age-standardised cervical cancer incidence rates below 4 or 10 per 100,000 women-years, and >85% reduction in cervical cancer incidence rate. We conducted sensitivity analyses and presented the median age-standardised predictions of outcomes of the three models (minimum-maximum across models). Findings: ) than girls' vaccination alone. Adding three-yearly cervical screening among WLHIV (to girls' vaccination and 2 lifetime cervical screens) further reduced age-standardised cervical cancer incidence to 3.3 (1.8-3.6) per 100,000 women-years overall and to 5.2 (3.9-8.5) among WLHIV by 2120 and averted on average 12-13% additional cumulative cancer cases among all women and 21-24% among WLHIV than girls' vaccination and 2 lifetime cervical screens over 25 years or longer. Long-term vaccine protection and using the nonavalent vaccine was required for elimination. Interpretation: High HPV vaccination coverage of girls and 2 lifetime cervical screens could eliminate cervical cancer among women overall in South Africa by the end of the century and substantially decrease cases among all women and WLHIV over the short and medium term. Cervical cancer elimination in WLHIV would likely require enhanced prevention strategies for WLHIV. Screening of WLHIV remains an important strategy to reduce incidence and alleviate disparities in cervical cancer burden between women with and without HIV, despite HIV interventions scale-up. Funding: World Health Organization. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health. MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, UK Medical Research Council. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development research. Cancer Association of South Africa. Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".