Potential population-level effectiveness of one-dose HPV vaccination in low-income and middle-income countries: a mathematical modelling analysis

BACKGROUND: Given the accumulating evidence that one-dose vaccination could provide high and sustained protection against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and related diseases, we examined the population-level effectiveness and efficiency of one-dose HPV vaccination of girls compared with two-dose vaccination, using mathematical modelling. METHODS: In this mathematical modelling study, we used HPV-ADVISE LMIC, an individual-based transmission-dynamic model independently calibrated to four epidemiologically diverse low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs; India, Nigeria, Uganda, and Viet Nam). We parameterised and calibrated the model using sexual behaviour and epidemiological data identified from international population-based datasets and the literature. All base-case vaccination scenarios start in 2023 with the nonavalent vaccine and assumed 80% vaccination coverage with one or two doses. We assumed that two doses of vaccine provide 100% efficacy against vaccine-type infections and a lifelong duration of protection. We examined a non-inferior vaccination scenario for one dose compared with two doses, pessimistic scenarios of lower one-dose vaccine efficacy (85%) or a shorter duration of protection (ie, 20 or 30 years), and the effectiveness of a mitigation scenario in which schedules would switch from one dose to two doses. We also did sensitivity analyses by varying vaccination coverage. We used three outcomes: the relative reduction in cervical cancer incidence, the number of cervical cancers averted, and the number of vaccine doses needed to prevent one cervical cancer. FINDINGS: Assuming non-inferior vaccine characteristics for one dose compared with two doses, the model projections show that two-dose or one-dose routine vaccination of girls aged 9 years (with a multi-age cohort vaccination of girls aged 10–14 years) would avert 12·0 million (80% UI 9·5–14·5) cervical cancers in India, 4·7 million (3·4–5·8) in Nigeria, 2·3 million (1·9–2·6) in Uganda, and 0·4 million (0·2–0·5) in Viet Nam over 100 years. Under pessimistic assumptions of lower one-dose efficacy (85%) or a shorter duration of protection (ie, 30 years), one-dose routine vaccination would avert 69% (61–80) to 94% (92–96) of the cervical cancers averted with two-dose routine vaccination. However, when assuming a duration of protection of 20 years, one-dose routine vaccination would avert substantially fewer cervical cancers (ie, 35% [26–44] to 69% [65–71] of the cervical cancers averted with two-dose routine vaccination). A switch from one-dose to two-dose routine vaccination of girls aged 9 years, with a one-dose catch-up of girls aged 10–14 years, 5 years after the start of the vaccination programme, could mitigate potential losses in cervical cancer prevention from a short one-dose duration of protection (averting 92% [83–98] to 99% [97–100]) of the cervical cancers averted with two-dose routine vaccination). One-dose routine vaccination would result in fewer doses needed to prevent one cervical cancer than two-dose routine vaccination, even if the duration of protection is as low as 20 years. Finally, for countries with two-dose routine vaccination, adding one-dose multi-age cohort vaccination in the first year would provide similar benefits as a two-dose multi-age cohort vaccination, and would be more efficient even under the pessimistic assumptions of lower one-dose vaccine efficacy or duration of protection. INTERPRETATION: One-dose routine vaccination could avert most of the cervical cancers averted with two-dose vaccination while being more efficient, provided the duration of one-dose protection is greater than 20–30 years (depending on the LMIC). The doses saved by introducing one-dose routine vaccination could offer the opportunity to vaccinate girls before they age out of the vaccination window of 9–14 years and, potentially, to vaccinate boys or older age groups. FUNDING: Fonds de recherche du Québec—Santé, Digital Research Alliance of Canada, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.