Aluminum granuloma after administration of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine. Report of a case.

Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
The American Journal of dermatopathology (Impact Factor: 1.43). 01/2009; 30(6):622-4. DOI: 10.1097/DAD.0b013e318185a691
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We report the case of a young woman who developed a subcutaneous granulomatous response after administration of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine. The inciting agent was most likely an aluminum adjuvant, which previously has been reported to be associated with a granulomatous response after administration of other vaccines. Histologically, the lesion consisted of a necrotic/necrobiotic center surrounded by palisading epithelioid histiocytes closely resembling deep granuloma annulare or rheumatoid nodule. The histiocytes contained abundant intracytoplasmic violaceous/gray granular material. An ammonium aurintricarboxylate (Aluminon) stain demonstrated the presence of aluminum in the granular material. Aluminum granulomas should be included in the differential diagnosis of deep granulomatous reaction in young women, due to the high frequency of vaccination in this population.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Necrobiosis refers to the degeneration of collagen fibres which is central to necrobiotic dermatitides. We describe these necrobiotic dermatitides; namely granuloma annulare, rheumatoid nodule, necrobiosis lipoidica and necrobiosis xanthogranuloma with an approach to diagnosis, clinical presentation and treatment options. In most instances, the diagnosis can be easily reached; however, at times this can be difficult and may require additional steps, including detailed clinical history, special stains, immunohistochemical stains and a repeat biopsy if necessary.
    Diagnostic Histopathology 04/2009; 15(4):186-194. DOI:10.1016/j.mpdhp.2009.02.001
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the advent of the Papanicolaou smear test almost 50 years ago, cervical cancer remains the second most common malignant disease in women and the leading cause of cancer death in developing countries. Thus the two prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines currently available have been greeted with enthusiasm internationally, as an emerging primary prevention strategy against cervical cancer. Prior to licensure the vaccines were trialed in over 60,000 women and assessed as safe, within the statistical constraints of the trials to detect very rare events. Post-licensure surveillance is underway as vaccination programs are undertaken. We reviewed published post-licensure surveillance data, as at January 2009, and concur with international advisory bodies that both HPV vaccines are safe, effective and of great importance for women's health. Ongoing monitoring is required to maintain confidence in the safety of the vaccines.
    Vaccine 09/2009; 27(52):7270-81. DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.09.097 · 3.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Studies of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, Cervarix and Gardasil provide strong evidence for the recommendation that HPV vaccines may minimize the incidence of cervical cancer over time. RECENT FINDINGS: Both Cervarix and Gardasil provided more than 90% efficacy in preventing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN 2+) disease caused by HPV 16 and 18 in women 16-26 years who were seronegative and PCR-negative for HPV 16 and 18 at baseline. Cervarix provides more than 75% efficacy in independent cross-protection against persistent HPV 31 and 45, and 47% efficacy against HPV 33; whereas Gardasil offers 50% efficacy only against persistent HPV 31. A reduction in excisional therapies for CIN 2+ is nearly 70% for Cervarix, and 40% for Gardasil. Cervarix efficacy is documented to 6.4 years; Gardasil's to 5 years. Immunologically, Cervarix induces three to nine-fold higher peak-neutralizing antibody titers to HPV 16/18 than Gardasil, has significantly higher cervicovaginal mucus-neutralizing antibody presence than Gardasil, and significantly higher B memory cell response than Gardasil. Safety reports indicate injection site reactions for both Cervarix and Gardasil. Rare serious adverse events have been reported.
    Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology 11/2009; 21(6):457-64. DOI:10.1097/GCO.0b013e328332c910 · 2.37 Impact Factor