HPV Vaccination in immunosuppressed patients with established skin warts and non-melanoma skin cancer: A single-institutional cohort study

Introduction

Skin warts and especially non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) are a major cause of morbidity in patients under chronic immunosuppressive treatment, such as patients after solid organ transplantation.^1-2 The incidence of NMSC increases with the duration of immunosuppressive therapy and develops mainly in sun-exposed areas. While cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is the most common skin cancer in transplant recipients, occurring 65-250 times more frequently than in the normal population, basal cell carcinoma is increased by a factor of 10 after organ transplantation. ^2-3 In addition, the occurrence of NMSC is associated with the occurrence of multiple keratotic lesions such as warts and premalignant actinic keratoses as well as intraepithelial neoplasia (Bowen’s disease), which can occur mainly on sun-exposed keratinised skin but also on mucous membranes. ^3-4 Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) appears to play an important co-carcinogenic role. The incidence of squamous cell carcinoma in transplant recipients increases with the number of keratotic lesions with detection of HPV DNA in 65-90 % of cases. The tumours also frequently show histological features of HPV infection and are usually difficult to distinguish clinically from normal skin warts.^5-7

HPV infections, which belong to the DNA viruses, affect the keratinocytes of the skin and mucosa. HPVs that affect the mucosa are classified as alpha HPVs. These are divided into low-risk types such as HPV 6 and 11, which induce most condylomas, and high-risk types such as HPV 16 and 18, which are involved in carcinogenesis of the uterus, cervix and orogenital pharynx. HPVs that affect keratinised skin include the alpha-, beta-, gamma-, Mu- and Nu-HPV genera. ⁸

Beta-HPV infection in keratinised skin appears to play a predisposing role in the genesis of NMSC and has been significantly clustered in cSCCs of immunosuppressed transplant recipients. The carcinogenic effect is seen as a combination of beta-HPV infection with ultraviolet (UV) light. ^9-10

As prevention of HPV infection, only vaccines for alpha-HPV infection have been developed and licensed. Vaccines for the prevention of beta-HPV strains are currently still under investigation.¹⁰ The three licensed HPV vaccines (Cervarix®, Gardasil®, and Gardasil-9®) on the market are designed to prevent α-HPV related diseases and provide highly effective protection specific to oral and anogenital mucosal HPV subtypes. ^10-11 The target of this vaccine is the viral capsid L1 of specific alpha HPV strains in mucosal types. Alpha-HPV and beta-HPV, however, show similarities in the immunogenic L1 and L2 capsid proteins.^10,12 In this regard, there is anecdotic evidence that HPV vaccination against alpha-genera has also resulted in regression of cutaneous warts and cutaneous SCCs. ^13-16 The similar expression of capsid proteins within the alpha and beta HPV genera could be a possible explanation in this regard. Also, mixed infections of alpha and beta HPV are discussed, explaining the response of vaccination against alpha strains.^10,12-16

However, no definitive explanations or systematic studies exist to investigate a therapeutic potential of alpha-HPV vaccination for NMSC or its precursors and warts.

This work evaluates recent activity of HPV immunization in immunosuppressed organ transplant recipients (and patients) with recurrent skin warts and non-melanoma skin cancer. In this regard, it must also be noted that patients with severe morbidities payed a relevant toll during the COVID-19 pandemic, and this is specifically true for patients with solid organ transplantations and/or immunosuppressive therapies.¹⁷ These patients require frequent screening examinations, including dermatology visits to reduce NMSC burden. Therefore, any retrospective analysis of treatment interventions in this field should be anlaysed with consideration of local COVID-19 caseloads and regulatory interventions.¹⁸

Methods

Results

38 patients who received three doses of the nonavalent HPV vaccine Gardasil-9® between December 5th, 2018 and January 1st, 2022 due to NMSC and/or recurrent skin warts were identified and included in the study. 76% of patients were male, mean age was 62 years (IQR: 50, 73). 25 (66%) were treated for SOT, 6 (15%) for tumors and 2 (5%) for autoimmunity and the remainder 5 (13%) for recalcitrant warts. 8 (21%) patients were without immunosuppression, 7 (18%) under mono-, 10 (26%) under dual and 13 (34%) under triple therapy. Among all patients, 16 (42%) received a CNI, 18 (47%) an antimetabolite (Azathioprine or Mycophenolate), 6 (16%) an mTor inhibitor, 17 (45%) PDN and 9 (24%) other IS (supplementary table 1).

Before study begin, 21 (55%) patients were diagnosed with NMSC (15 SCC, 6 CIS) and 17 (45%) with warts without NMSC. 16 (42%) patients had had solitary lesions, 22 (58%) patients multiple lesions at sunexposed localisations (acral, facial). Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1. All patients received 3 Gardasil-9® vaccinations according to a 3-dose schedule with a median interval of 1.8 months (IQR 1.7-2.1 between first and second and 6.0 months (IQR 5.6-6.1) between first and last months.

Overall 1040 visits with 915 interventions (422 minors and 493 majors) in 100.0 patient years were analysed. 318 visits and 285 interventions (102 minor, 183 major) between first vaccination and one month after last vaccination were included from the analysis. Major interventions included biopsies (n=69), curettages (n=538) and excisions (n=79), minor interventions cryotherapies (n=578) and topical treatments (n=882). 171 visits were without interventions. 425 visits in 37 patient years were analyzed before vaccination and 297 visits in 38 patient years after vaccination (Table 2).

Major dermatological interventions declined after vaccination from a mean of 0.7/year [IQR: 0.0-0.8] to 0.2/year [IQR: 0.0-0.2] (p<0.05) and 68.4% (26/38) of patients experienced a decline in major interventional events. Additionally, minor interventions declined from a mean of 0.6 [IQR: 0.1-0.9] to 0.1/year [IQR: 0.0-0.1] (p<0.01) with a positive response in similar 68.4% of patients (26/38). Similar, overall visits declined from 1.3 to 0.4/year (p<0.01), while visits without any interventions remained stabile (0.1/year to 0.1/year, p=n.s.), see Figure 1.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1: Interventions during study period

To further these investigations, we performed a time to event-analysis for repeated major dermatological events for each patient. Interestingly, hazard radio for major intervention was 0.27 (CI 0.14-0.51, p <0.001) between pre –and post-Gardasil-9®. Gardasil-9® intervention remained effective in reducing major dermatological interventions after correction for relevant co-factors (full model, HR 0.2, CI 0.11-0.37, p<0.001) and even after correction for national COVID-case load (full model + COVID, HR 0.17, CI 0.09-0.33, p<0.001). Since a relevant proportion of patients received their vaccination schedule during or in the early phase of the COVID pandemic (21.1% completed their vaccination before, 78.9% after start of COVID shutdown in Switzerland on March 16^th, 2020; Table 3).

Dermatological tumor occurrence is dependent on baseline parameters including patient age, history of dermatological interventions, treatment regimen and treatment indication. To study this, we performed logistic regression analysis in a GLM (generalized linear model) with vaccination response (decline of annual major interventions, 26/38 patients) as dependent and previous interventional burden, age at vaccination, number of immunosuppressive drugs and treatment indication (TPL vs. non-TPL) as independent factors. Indeed, TPL patients (OR 7.1 [CI: 0.83-76.8], p=0.086) and heavy pre-vaccination treatment burden (OR 3.68, [CI: 1.06-17.7], p=0.062) was associated with increased odds ratio for treatment response. (Table 4).

Discussion

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and its precursors are the most frequent carcinomas in solid organ transplantation and chronic immunosuppression and correlate with cutaneous human papillomavirus infections, namely the beta-HPV types.^1-4

The licensed vaccines for HPV immunization are directed against alpha types on mucosa, whereas beta HPV types are mainly found on keratinised skin.^3-4 To date, there is no good evidence on a possible immunizing effect of these vaccinations against antigens from beta-HPVs on keratinised skin. An effective immunological target of HPVs is the viral capsid envelope, consisting of the minor capsid proteins L1 and L2. Therefore, the currently approved vaccines consist of L1 virus-like particles (VLPs) from certain alpha-HPVs. These vaccines also appear to have cross-reactivity of other alpha-HPV subtypes, but this is highly variable and often low titer.¹⁰ In addition, cross-reactivity has also been measured in an RCT with induced antibody titers of cutaneous beta-HPV types.²⁰ Although this seroconversion of antibodies against cutaneous HPV was rather low in titer and the variability large in the affected individuals, there is anecdotic evidence that clinical regression of cSCC and its precursors can occur after administration of licensed alpha-HPV vaccination.^12-14

We here report a reduction in dermatology interventional treatment burden in IS patients after administration of an alpha-HPV vaccination, namely Gardasil-9® vaccination. Indeed, median surgical treatment frequency declined by 71% form 0.7/year to 0.2/year within the first 12 months after vaccination. The effect was observed universal throughout various patient groups, involving transplant recipients, older patients and patients with recurrent diseases, but was most experienced in TPL recipients and patients with a previous high tumor burden.

Notably, the recent COVID pandemic with shutdown of general medical services had no impact on interventions during the observation period. Likely, included patients with a high risk of de novo or recurrent skin tumor burden were not restricted to medical limitations.

To our knowledge, this is among the largest cohort of dermatology patients at risk for recurrent keratotic skin lesions investigating the effect of Gardasil-9® vaccination in respect of major surgical intervention. The study population comprised a typical cohort of IS patients in a tertiary dermatology clinic and repeated and well documented treatment log for vaccination and dermatology interventions.

However, this study has some limitations. First the retrospective study design and the rather low number of patients does not allow to exclude all co-founders with may influence study results (patient no-shows, drop-outs). Furthermore, no detailed analysis of HPV infection (type) before and after vaccination and no data on vaccine-specific HPV antibody measurements are available.

The question remains whether a possible seroconversion with mostly low titers against non-genital skin HPV types really has clinical relevance. A possible explanation could be a mixed infection of different HPV types. Thus, sometimes genital mostly high-risk alpha-HPVs are found in cSCC besides beta-HPVs.^21-23 Thus, antibody generated in L1 vaccines could explain some immunity in skin cancer development in selective cases with high mucosal activity.¹⁰ However, large-scale prospective RCTs for definitive confirmation are lacking.

Furthermore, attempts are being made to develop vaccination against beta-HPV infections. To date, yet, no anti-beta HPV vaccine is on the market. The large heterogeneity of HPV types in cutaneous keratotic lesions makes the development of efficient anti-beta HPV vaccines difficult.¹⁰ Also, the direct effect of beta-HPV infection on cutaneous carcinogenesis remains obscure. The development of skin cancer has long been considered as a co-carcinogenic effect of beta-HPV with UV light.⁹ UV irradiation of HPV-infected keratinocytes increases the promoter activity of papillomaviruses and HPV oncoproteins may inhibit the repair of UV-dependent DNA damage in keratinocytes.^{9, 24} In addition, immunosuppressive drugs such as calcineurin inhibitors (e.g. ciclosporin A and tacrolimus) have an inhibitory effect on tumour suppressor genes such as p53, which additionally promotes the development of skin carcinogenesis, and can therefore also have an inhibitory effect on DNA repair mechanisms in the case of UV damage and HPV infection.^{9, 25} Another explanation could be the loss of specific T-cell immunity against the paplloma virus. It has been shown in animal models in rats that suppression of a CD8+T cell-mediated immune response to beta-HPV infection promotes the development of SCCs.^{10, 26} However, these findings do not explain the increased risk of SCC development in immunocompetent patients with beta-HPV infection. A potential explanation could be that in certain immunocompetent patients there is a subclinical dysfunktion of specific CD8+ T-cell or a locally suppression of cutaneous T-cells by UV light on sun exposed sides that favour SCC development.^{9-10, 26}

In summary, the association between beta-HPV and cSCC development and the increasing burden of cSCC development especially in immunocompromised patients highlights the need for efficient immunization against HPV-related skin cancer. Although the direct effect of alpha-HPV vaccination in cutaneous HPV infection has not been proven, our study demonstrated a significant decrease in dermatologic procedures in immunosuppressed patients after administration of Gardasil-9® vaccination. Our data show that with administration of such a vaccination, the skin tumor burden in these patients can be significantly decreased. This could reduce invasive procedures and overall mortality as well as healthcare costs. Our data may pave the way for further prospective and randomized controlled trials, which are needed to prove the effect of alpha-HPV in cutaneous HPV infection.