
Cancer caused by HPV is increasing in some women in the U.S.
A new study shows that the percentage of women screened for cervical cancer fell from 47% in 2019 to 41% in 2023.
Rural women are 25% more likely to be diagnosed and 42% more likely to die from cervical cancer than women who live in cities, a trend that likely reflects lower screening rates in less populated areas, according to the study, published in JAMA Network Open this month.
Every year, 13,000 women in the U.S. are diagnosed with cervical cancer, which is almost always caused by HPV, or human papillomavirus. About 4,320 die each year, according to the American Cancer Society.
Cervical cancer rates have been edging upward among women in their 30s and early 40s, perhaps because women ages 21 to 29 are the least likely to be up to date on their screenings, with 29% being overdue.
Cervical cancer takes several years to develop, progressing from abnormal cell changes and precancers before transforming into cancer. Studies show that women are also less likely to be screened if they are nonwhite, uninsured or identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual.
HPV vaccines are safe and can prevent 90% of cervical cancers. Yet resistance to the vaccine, which protects against cancer-causing strains of the sexually transmitted infection, has persisted since it was approved almost 20 years ago. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has disparaged them as dangerous, linking HPV shots to autoimmune conditions and mental illness.
A federal judge in North Carolina on March 10 dismissed legal claims that the HPV shot, sold by Merck as Gardasil, could cause patients to develop certain health conditions.
Another lawsuit alleging that Gardasil causes serious side effects has been put on hold until September because of Kennedy's involvement in the case. Although Kennedy disclosed in an ethics statement that he stood to receive referral fees from one of the law firms suing Merck, he later said he would give any earnings to his son.
Vaccine hesitancy has kept many parents from vaccinating their children. Only 61% of adolescents are up to date on all HPV vaccines, given as a series of two or three shots depending on age.
More than 42 million people in the U.S. carry at least one strain of HPV that can cause disease, including genital warts or cancer, and 47,00 a year are diagnosed with an HPV-linked malignancy. Yet research has found a decline in awareness that HPV is linked with a number of cancers, including cervical, throat and anal.
With so many people at risk, we asked experts to help clear up confusion over HPV vaccination and screening.
How often should women be screened for cervical cancer?
The American Cancer Society recommends that people have a primary HPV test every five years from ages 25 to 65. If primary HPV testing is not available, the society recommends either combining an HPV test with a Pap test every five years or a Pap test alone every three years
How have HPV vaccines affected rates of cervical cancer and precancer?
Among women ages 20 to 24 — who were eligible for HPV shots as adolescents — the incidence of cervical precancer fell nearly 80% from 2008 to 2002, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cervical cancer incidence fell 65% from 2012 to 2019 among women under 25. Death rates from cervical cancer among the same age group fell 62% from 2013-2015 to 2019-2021.
How common is HPV?
HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States. Among sexually active people, more than 90% of men and 80% of women are infected with HPV during their lifetimes. About half of HPV infections involve high-risk strains. In addition to cervical cancer, HPV can cause cancers of the vagina, vulva, anus, penis and head and neck.
Given how common these viruses are, no one should feel embarrassed to learn they have HPV, said Dr. Rebecca Perkins, an obstetrician-gynecologist and investigator at the Woman, Mother and Baby Research Institute at Tufts Medical Center. 'We need to decrease the stigma associated with having a positive test,' Perkins said.
What does it mean if a test shows you have high-risk HPV?
Although there are more than 200 types of HPV, only a few cause cancer. These types are known as high-risk strains and are included in routine cervical cancer screenings, because they have the highest chance of causing cancer, said Dr. Verda Hicks, immediate past president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 'If an HPV test is positive for high-risk HPV, it indicates an active infection that increases the risk for development of a pre-cancer or cancer,' Hicks said.
Does being infected with high-risk HPV give you a high risk of cancer?
A. No. The immune system clears most HPV infections within a year or two, Hicks said. Most people with high-risk HPV experience short-term infections that cause mild changes in cervical cells, which return to normal once the infection clears.
Doctors become more concerned if someone tests positive for high-risk HPV for longer than two years as persistent infections can lead to the development of a precancer or cancer. About 1% of people with HPV develop a 'long-term, chronic infection' and even fewer develop cervical cancer, Hicks said.
'Women should not freak out' just because they have high-risk HPV, Hicks said. A positive test 'means the screening process is doing its job. It is identifying someone who possibly has a persistent infection.'
Undergoing routine screenings and any recommended follow-up tests allow doctors to catch these changes early, when they're easier to treat, Perkins said.
That's why it's essential not to skip any checkups, she said.
'The longer that someone remains positive, the higher the risk' of developing cancer, Perkins said.
How common are high-risk HPV infections?
Among women screened for the first time in their 20s and 30s, up to 20% learn that they have high-risk HPV, said Dr. Mark Einstein, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology and women's health at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine.
What should people with high-risk HPV infections do?
There's no blanket prescription for people with high-risk HPV, said Hicks, who noted that doctors tailor their advice for each individual, depending on a variety of risk factors.
While people with high-risk HPV shouldn't panic, they should take the finding seriously, follow their doctor's advice and attend any recommended follow-up visits, she said. These visits allow doctors to look for abnormal cells, which can be removed before they turn into cancer.
Can people who were vaccinated against HPV still test positive?
Yes. That's because the original HPV shots, which were approved for children and adolescents in 2006, protected against the two riskiest viral strains, which together cause 70% of cervical cancer, as well as two strains that cause genital warts. Although the first HPV vaccines were very effective, people who were vaccinated with them could be infected with one of the HPV strains that cause the other 30% of cervical cancers, Perkins said. Updated HPV shots now protect against nine strains of the virus and protect against 90% of cervical and anal cancers, as well as most strains that cause mouth and throat cancers.
Can you test positive for high-risk HPV years after being infected?
Yes. A positive HPV test doesn't necessarily reflect a recent infection.
Although the immune system usually does a good job of controlling HPV, the virus doesn't disappear from the body. HPV can sometimes reactivate, especially if a person's immune system has been under stress due to an illness or certain medications, Perkins said.
'We see reactivations in women who have not been sexually active in 10 years,' Perkins said. 'It's just a function of the virus escaping the immune system. You should never get a divorce over a diagnosis of HPV.'
In some ways, HPV is similar to the chickenpox virus, which can hide in nerve cells for decades before reactivating and causing a painful condition called shingles.
'It doesn't matter whether the infection is old or new; we still need to follow up,' Perkins said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
2 days ago
- BBC News
Bewdley cancer survivor says NHS smear test move 'horrendous'
A cervical cancer survivor from Worcestershire has described the changes to smear testing in England as "horrendous". From July 2025, women aged 25 to 49 will be invited for cervical screening every five years, instead of every Wood, from Bewdley, who was diagnosed with cervical cancer in January 2022, said: "It's horrendous. I think it should be less time to wait - yearly is a long time for someone who is concerned."But an NHS spokesperson said: "We recognise that changes to cervical screening can seem worrying but want to reassure everyone that this new approach is based on robust scientific evidence." Dr Helen Leach, a GP at Nunwell Surgery in Bromyard, told BBC Hereford and Worcester that she supported the NHS's changes to how they screen cervical cancer. "This comes down to a much better understanding of the causes of cervical cancer, the main cause is the HPV or the Human Papillomavirus," she said."We now have a much more accurate testing and we know it takes someone many years to develop cervical cancer after they get HPV."But we're also vaccinating 12 to 13 year old girls and boys against HPV so all of these things combined have told us that we can extend that interval safely." But Ms Wood, who was diagnosed with cervical cancer more than two years after her smear test result was incorrectly recorded as normal, said she would still want her daughters to be checked much more regularly. She said: "Three years if you haven't got any issues but to go to five years, I mean I have two daughters and I would want them checked a lot more regular than every five years. "I think that's a very, very long time." Follow BBC Hereford & Worcester on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.


The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
James Van Der Beek says there were no ‘warning signs' before his cancer diagnosis
Actor James Van Der Beek provided an update on his stage three colorectal cancer journey, two years after his diagnosis, stating it has been a challenging 'full-time job.' He emphasized the importance of early screening for colorectal cancer, even without symptoms, as he experienced no warning signs before his diagnosis. Van Der Beek shared his approach to discussing his illness with his six children, advocating for honesty tailored to their understanding. He recounted how he initially dismissed irregular bowel movements as a minor issue before a gastroenterologist diagnosed him with cancer. The American Cancer Society recommends regular colorectal cancer screenings begin at age 45 for individuals with average risk.


The Guardian
4 days ago
- The Guardian
US medical groups fill gap with own vaccine guides amid ‘information crisis'
The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is adopting a recommendation from independent advisers to drop thimerosal, a preservative found in about 4% of flu vaccines, despite evidence that it poses no risks and helps prevent bacterial and fungal infections. But Robert F Kennedy Jr, the HHS secretary, has not adopted two other votes from the advisory meeting: recommending annual flu vaccines for everyone over the age of six months and RSV shots for infants. As science becomes increasingly politicized and federal officials change policies on vaccination, sometimes reportedly over the advice of their own scientists, independent scientific groups are now stepping into the gap for evidence-based recommendations. Medical groups now plan to issue vaccine recommendations in the wake of changes to routine vaccine guidance from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Recommendations like these may help the public – and health insurance companies – understand which shots should be part of the routine schedule, and why. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) announced this month that it will release new guidance for Covid, flu and RSV vaccination during pregnancy. The guidance will appear at the end of the summer, before the winter respiratory season. Five other scientific groups – the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American College of Physicians – also plan to release vaccine guidance. The news comes amid growing changes to how vaccines are recommended by US officials. Kennedy and other officials have also announced new restrictions on Covid vaccines, and Kennedy framed vaccination with the measles, mumps, and rubella shot as a 'personal' choice during the worst US measles outbreak in three decades. A new endeavor, the Vaccine Integrity Project, is now conducting a wide-ranging review of scientific studies on vaccines, due to wrap up in the next two to three weeks. The volunteer-driven vaccine project is analyzing 16,400 publications on flu, Covid and RSV vaccines. The scientific groups will then draw upon that review to issue guidance for the populations they serve, including children, high-risk people, pregnant people and healthy adults. 'We're not making recommendations ourselves. We're just providing them with the information,' said Michael Osterholm, the epidemiologist heading the project at the University of Minnesota's Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy (Cidrap). It is an effort to take up the work done by the CDC's independent advisory group, the advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP), since 1964. 'For the past five-plus decades, we have looked at the CDC as the authoritative source for guidance and information related to vaccines,' said Scott Rivkees, associate dean for education in the Brown University School of Public Health and former surgeon general of Florida. Now, 'the medical community very much disagrees with' the current approach from health agencies, he said, and it is quickly pivoting from relying on CDC recommendations to collaborating on their own. Americans are facing an 'information crisis' as official guidance falters, Osterholm said. 'The CDC science has been corrupted'. Changing official health guidance 'results in total confusion', Rivkees said. 'Who do you listen to? It really puts parents and families in an incredibly difficult situation.' Parents 'have more questions now than before. We see more vaccine hesitancy than before. We see more vaccine refusal than before,' Rivkees continued. 'These changes that are happening now are the result of politics, not related to science.' Organizations like the Vaccine Integrity Project and its collaboration with medical groups will be vital to 'preserve what we know works' when it comes to protecting people from infectious diseases and other health issues, said Rivkees. The scientific groups already have expertise – and trust – in these areas, he said. Working together will help them make evidence-based, trustworthy recommendations. Kennedy announced in May that the CDC would no longer recommend Covid vaccines during pregnancy, despite strong and consistent evidence that the vaccines are safe in pregnancy and that pregnancy is a major risk factor for severe illness and death from Covid. 'Immunization is especially important during pregnancy, when the risks of severe outcomes are heightened – and when vaccines can provide critical protection to the infant after birth,' Sandra E Brooks, CEO of ACOG, said in a statement. The CDC also changed the pediatric Covid recommendation from 'should' to 'may' and FDA officials put greater restrictions on who may receive Covid boosters. Yet Covid remains a major threat. 'This year, the number of hospitalizations, serious illnesses and deaths in kids from Covid exceeded that of influenza, and this was one of the worst influenza years in a decade,' Osterholm said. Flu and RSV also pose major risks, and without recommendations from the CDC for annual boosters, those vaccines and preventives could face an uncertain future. The respiratory vaccine guidance is only the beginning, Osterholm said. 'This was just the first effort, because it was the most immediate need right now.' After this, the organization will focus on data for other routine vaccinations. 'The thought that we now have to care for more children with measles, more children with whooping cough than before, is really very unfortunate,' Rivkees said. 'I'm very afraid that this country is moving to a situation where some elements within our nation are going to accept children dying of measles, children dying of whooping cough, teenagers dying of meningitis, not getting vaccinated as the new normal. And the thought that we are going to now be able to think that this is acceptable is frankly terrifying.' Outside guidance will help parents and providers navigate the evidence on vaccines, Rivkees said – and it may help insurers decide which vaccines to cover. Under the Affordable Care Act, insurers are required to cover vaccines recommended by ACIP. 'As ACIP makes changes to recommendations, then the question comes, are these vaccines going to continue to be covered or not? Whereas before insurance may pay for certain vaccines, maybe they won't in the future, which means families will have to pay out of pocket,' Rivkees said. Decreases in vaccination could mean manufacturers make fewer vaccines or pull out of the market entirely. 'The other thing that we're also very worried about is what's going to happen to the vaccine supply,' Rivkees said. Vaccines help insurers save money by preventing illness, Osterholm said. 'But they've got to have a basis for making the decision that 'we will support this,' and that's what we're trying to provide.' The outside recommendations are meant as a stopgap measure, Osterholm says. 'We need our old ACIP back. We need to have the kind of scientific expertise, based on the expertise in the community, to ensure the vaccine enterprise is healthy and exists,' Osterholm said. 'We're not, as the Vaccine Integrity Project, hoping that we exist for very long. We'd love to see us go away because of the return of ACIP and CDC leadership,' he added. But, he said, 'we know that that's not going to happen, at least for the next few years'.