Induction of immune memory following administration of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine

Olsson, Sven-Eric; Villa, Luisa L.; Costa, Ronaldo; Petta, Carlos Alberto; Andrade, Rosíres Pereira de; Malm, Christian; Iversen, Ole‐Erik; Høye, John; Steinwall, Margareta; Riis-Johannessen, Grete; Andersson-Ellström, Agneta; Elfgren, Kristina; Krogh, Geo von; Lehtinen, Matti; Paavonen, Jorma; Tamms, Gretchen; Giacoletti, Katherine E.D.; Lupinacci, Lisa; Esser, Mark T.; Vuocolo, Scott; Saah, Alfred J.; Barr, Eliav

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.03.049

Cited by 406 publications

(291 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

260

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…19 In subjects vaccinated under the traditional scheme, the application of an extra (fourth) dose of the vaccine 60 months after the first vaccination resulted in a rapid and vigorous memory immune response against all 4 HPV genotypes included in the qHPV vaccine, which exceeded the levels of GMTs observed one month after the third dose. 20 This response was similar to the response observed with the Hepatitis B vaccine. 21 In 2008 Mexico implemented an extended vaccination schedule of 0-6-60 months in girls younger than 16 y.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Evaluation of the immunogenicity of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine using 2 versus 3 doses at month 21: An epidemiological surveillance mechanism for alternate vaccination schemes

Hernández-Ávila

Torres‐Ibarra

Stanley

et al. 2015

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Evaluation of the immunogenicity of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine using 2 versus 3 doses at month 21: An epidemiological surveillance mechanism for alternate vaccination schemes

Hernández-Ávila

Torres‐Ibarra

Stanley

et al. 2015

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Bridging studies have shown that vaccinating women in the age groups 26 years and above induces universal antibody response and, although the antibody titres are significantly lower as women age, they remain at a significantly higher level than the titres induced by natural infection; moreover, more indication of immune memory in the quadrivalent vaccine trial has been reported (Olsson et al, 2007). Although to date, no correlate of protection can be linked to antibody titres, largely from animal experiments it is generally accepted that antibody production and protection from infection are interrelated.…”

Section: Immunogenicity By Agementioning

confidence: 99%

HPV and cervical cancer: screening or vaccination?

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the demonstration of the superior validity of human papillomavirus (HPV) tests in screening for cervical cancer and the arrival of highly efficacious HPV 16 and 18 vaccines, cervical cancer prevention enters a time of sustainable introduction in developing countries. Multidisciplinary efforts and novel protocols are being developed, and challenging situations are being faced to make cervical cancer, still the number two cancer in women worldwide, an eradicable condition. The provocative title proposed by the editors of the British Journal of Cancer could have at first sight, a quick and intuitive answer: we will need both. We need human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines to significantly reduce the health care burden currently required for cervical cancer prevention, and we need screening because of the limitations of current HPV vaccines both in their lack of therapeutic effect (thus not protecting women with an ongoing neoplastic processes) and in their limited number of HPV types (thus leaving to evolve some 25 -30% of cervical cancer cases related to HPV types other than 16 or 18). However, the answer only applies in scenarios in which screening is already developed and reasonably efficient. In populations without adequate screening, one could equally argue that HPV vaccines at affordable prices are the only realistic option. While these arrive, more efficient screening schemes, for example with low-cost HPV tests, requiring fewer visits or strategies involving rapid intervention like 'screen and treat' protocols, remain the only option for currently living adult women. Moreover, should polyvalent vaccines (including some five -eight HPV types) result in extending protection against more than 90% þ of the oncogenic HPV types, vaccination alone would be the answer for both scenarios. Thus, a complex answer to an apparent straightforward question. PHASE III HPV VACCINATION TRIALSWith the publication of the key short-term results of the two major Phase III trials of HPV vaccines, the perspective of tackling cervical cancer prevention with vaccination has been unambiguously open. While recognising the limitations of the still moderate (5 -6 years) follow-up in a few tens of thousand young women, two vaccines to date have shown high efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, long-term duration of protection and a strong suggestions of induction of immune memory (Harper et al, 2006;Garland et al, 2007;Paavonen et al, 2007; The Future II Study Group, 2007).A number of clinically relevant issues remain to be fully described, including the magnitude and the HPV spectrum included in the cross protection effect, and the long-term effects of each of the HPV vaccines on cancer protection and safety. However, to solve these questions, it is unavoidable to continue the studies for additional follow-up time and the organisation of large Phase IV studies, some of which are already in place.The currently available vaccines offer full protection to HPV 16-and 18-naïve women for these two HPV types that cause an estimated 70% of ce...

show abstract

“…Seventeen thousand six-hundred and twenty-two women aged [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] were enrolled in 1 of 2 randomized, placebo-controlled, efficacy trials (Protocols 013 and 015). Vaccine or placebo was given at day 1, month 2 and 6.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[16][17][18] Previous studies have shown that the HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine generates an anamnestic response in women who are seropositive to vaccine HPV types prevaccination ( Fig. 1) 19,20 and prevents reinfection or reactivation of disease that is related to vaccine HPV types. 21 In contrast, the HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine does not impact progression of HPV16 or HPV18 infections to disease (i.e., there was no impact in women who were seronegative and DNA positive to HPV16 or HPV18).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of an HPV6/11/16/18 L1 virus‐like particle vaccine on progression to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in seropositive women with HPV16/18 infection

Haupt¹,

Wheeler²,

Brown

et al. 2011

Intl Journal of Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine on development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2‐3 or adenocarcinoma in situ (CIN2‐3/AIS) in women with ongoing HPV16 or 18 infections prevaccination is reported. Seventeen thousand six‐hundred and twenty‐two women aged 16–26 were enrolled in 1 of 2 randomized, placebo‐controlled, efficacy trials (Protocols 013 and 015). Vaccine or placebo was given at day 1, month 2 and 6. Women were tested for HPV6/11/16/18 DNA and antibodies at day 1. We focus on the subset of women who were seropositive and DNA positive to HPV16 or HPV18 prevaccination. Incidence is expressed as the number of women with an endpoint per 100 person‐years‐at‐risk. In total, 419 vaccine and 446 placebo recipients were both seropositive and DNA positive to HPV16 or HPV18 prevaccination and had at least one follow‐up visit. In Protocol 013, the incidence of HPV16/18‐related CIN2‐3/AIS among these women was 10.9 in the vaccine arm and 7.0 in the placebo arm (vaccine efficacy = −54.9; 95% CI: −181.7, 13.0). In Protocol 015, the incidence of HPV16/18‐related CIN2‐3/AIS was 5.5 in the vaccine arm and 6.2 in the placebo arm (vaccine efficacy = 12.2%; 95% CI: −29.8, 40.9). These data suggest HPV vaccination neither reduces nor enhances progression to HPV16/18‐related high grade cervical lesions, and cervical cytology screening and corresponding management should continue as per local recommendations. Ultimately, population‐based surveillance of vaccinated individuals beyond these clinical trials will be required to further address questions regarding the impact of vaccination in women exposed to vaccine HPV types before vaccination.

show abstract

Induction of immune memory following administration of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine

Cited by 406 publications

References 29 publications

Evaluation of the immunogenicity of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine using 2 versus 3 doses at month 21: An epidemiological surveillance mechanism for alternate vaccination schemes

Evaluation of the immunogenicity of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine using 2 versus 3 doses at month 21: An epidemiological surveillance mechanism for alternate vaccination schemes

HPV and cervical cancer: screening or vaccination?

Impact of an HPV6/11/16/18 L1 virus‐like particle vaccine on progression to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in seropositive women with HPV16/18 infection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About