[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Vaccines are now available for the prevention of HPV-16/18-related cervical infections and pre-cancers, primarily targeting adolescent girls. Since the risk of HPV exposure potentially persists throughout a woman's sexual life, vaccine-derived immunity should be long-term. The current study, HPV-024 (NCT00546078, http://clinicaltrials.gov), assessed the immune memory in North American women who received three doses of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine 7 years earlier in HPV-001 (NCT00689741). METHODS: Women vaccinated in HPV-001 received a 4th-dose of the HPV-16/18 vaccine (024-4DV group, N=65). Post 4th-dose immune responses were compared with post 1st-dose immune responses in cross-vaccination controls (024-3DV group, N=50). Reactogenicity was compared between the 4th-dose and the 1st-dose administration. RESULTS: Pre 4th-dose, 100% of subjects in the 024-4DV group remained seropositive for anti-HPV-16/18 antibodies (ELISA). Compared to pre 4th-dose, GMTs for anti-HPV-16 and anti-HPV-18 antibodies were respectively 9.3-fold and 8.7-fold higher at day 7, and 22.7-fold and 17.2-fold higher at month 1. Compared to post 1st-dose, GMTs for anti-HPV-16 and anti-HPV-18 were respectively 80.5-fold and 205.4-fold higher at day 7, and 11.8-fold and 20.5-fold higher at month 1. Furthermore, 68.2% and 77.3% of women had HPV-16/18 specific memory B-cells, respectively, pre 4th-dose, rising to 100% one month post 4th-dose vaccination. The 4th-dose was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: A 4th-dose of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine triggered a rapid and strong anamnestic response in previously vaccinated women, demonstrating vaccine-induced immune memory.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Protection against oncogenic non-vaccine types (cross-protection) offered by human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines may provide a significant medical benefit. Available clinical efficacy data suggest the two licensed vaccines (HPV-16/18 vaccine, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals (GSK), and HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine, Merck & Co., Inc.) differ in terms of protection against oncogenic non-vaccine HPV types -31/45. The immune responses induced by the two vaccines against these two non-vaccine HPV types (cross-reactivity) was compared in an observer-blind study up to Month 24 (18 mo post-vaccination), in women HPV DNA-negative and seronegative prior to vaccination for the HPV type analyzed (HPV-010 [NCT00423046]). Geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs) measured by pseudovirion-based neutralization assay (PBNA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) were similar between vaccines for HPV-31/45. Seropositivity rates for HPV-31 were also similar between vaccines; however, there was a trend for higher seropositivity with the HPV-16/18 vaccine (13.0-16.7%) versus the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine (0.0-5.0%) for HPV-45 with PBNA, but not ELISA. HPV-31/45 cross-reactive memory B-cell responses were comparable between vaccines. Circulating antigen-specific CD4+ T-cell frequencies were higher for the HPV-16/18 vaccine than the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine (HPV-31 [geometric mean ratio [GMR] =2.0; p=0.0002] and HPV-45 [GMR=2.6; p=0.0092]), as were the proportion of T-cell responders (HPV-31, p=0.0009; HPV-45, p=0.0793). In conclusion, immune response to oncogenic non-vaccine HPV types -31/45 was generally similar for both vaccines with the exception of T-cell response which was higher with the HPV-16/18 vaccine. Considering the differences in cross-protective efficacy between the two vaccines, the results might provide insights into the underlying mechanism(s) of protection.
Human vaccines 12/2011; 7(12):1359-73. · 3.14 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine (Cervarix®, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals) administered according to its licensed vaccination schedule (3-dose, 3D) and formulation (20 μg of each HPV antigen; 20/20F) has previously been demonstrated. This partially-blind, controlled, randomized trial (NCT00541970) evaluated 2-dose (2D) schedules using the licensed 20/20F or an alternative formulation containing 40 μg of each antigen (40/40F), compared with the licensed 3D schedule. Healthy females stratified by age (9-14, 15-19, 20-25 y) were randomized to receive 2 doses of 20/20F at Months (M) 0,6 (n=240), 40/40F at M0,6 (n=241) or 40/40F at M0,2 (n=240), or 3 doses of 20/20F at M0,1,6 (licensed schedule/formulation, n=239). One month after the last dose, the 3D schedule was not immunologically superior to 2D schedules except in the 40/40F M0,2 group for HPV-16 (lower limit of 95% CI geometric mean antibody titer (GMT) ratio [2D/3D] < 0.5). For both HPV-16 and HPV-18, the 2D schedules in girls 9-14 y were immunologically non-inferior to the 3D schedule in women 15-25 y (the age group in which efficacy has been demonstrated) (upper limit of 95% CI for GMT ratio [3D/2D] < 2) one month after the last dose. At Month 24, non-inferiority was maintained for the 2D M0,6 schedules in girls 9-14 y versus the 3D schedule in women 15-25 y. All formulations had acceptable reactogenicity and safety profiles. These results indicate that the HPV-16/18 vaccine on a 2D M0,6 schedule is immunogenic and generally well tolerated in girls 9-14 y and that the 2D schedule is likely adequate for younger females.
Human vaccines 12/2011; 7(12):1374-86. · 3.14 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: A combined immunization strategy for administration of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine with other routine vaccines may lead to better compliance. Reactions and immunologic interference with concomitantly administered vaccines are unpredictable, necessitating clinical evaluation.
This was a randomized, open study conducted at 48 centers in the United States (NCT00369824). Healthy girls 11 to 18 years of age were randomized equally to 1 of 6 groups to receive 3 doses of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine administered at 0, 1, and 6 or 1, 2, and 7 months, with or without 1 dose of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) and/or 1 dose of meningococcal polysaccharide diphtheria toxoid conjugate vaccine (MCV4) in different coadministration regimens (1283 girls vaccinated). Coadministered vaccines were injected at separate sites. Antibodies were measured for all vaccine components. Reactogenicity and safety were monitored.
The prespecified criteria for noninferiority were met for all primary and secondary immunogenicity end points, demonstrating similar immunogenicity of Tdap and MCV4 when given alone or coadministered with the HPV vaccine. Immunogenicity of the HPV vaccine (in terms of seroconversion rates and geometric mean antibody titers to HPV antigens) was similar, regardless of whether it was given alone or coadministered with Tdap and/or MCV4. No differences were observed in the reactogenicity profile of the HPV vaccine administered alone or coadministered with either Tdap and/or MCV4 in different regimens.
Concomitant administration of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine with Tdap and/or MCV4 in different regimens did not interfere with the immune response to any of the vaccines and had an acceptable safety profile.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To determine the prevalence of cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and risk factors in young women from Brazil, Canada, and the USA. Cross-sectional study in 3204 healthy women, aged 15 to 25 years. Cervical samples were collected for cytology and for HPV DNA detection (SPF 10-LiPA 25 system). Serum samples were collected for the measurement of HPV-16 and HPV-18 antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Risk factors were obtained through a questionnaire. Overall, 26.6% of women had DNA detected for at least 1 HPV type. The prevalence for oncogenic HPV types was 21.7% (25% in Brazil, 16.9% in Canada, and 19.1% in the USA). HPV-16 was the most prevalent oncogenic type (5.2%). The next most common oncogenic HPV types were 51 (3.3%), 52 (3.3%), 31 (2.9%), 66 (2.3%), and 39 (2.0%). Multiple oncogenic types were detected in one-third of the infections. The prevalence of HPV-16 and/or HPV-18 infections detected by DNA and/or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was 24.8%. The majority of women (85%) had a normal cervical cytology. Sexual behavior was the main determinant for HPV-16/18 infections and squamous intraepithelial lesions. The prevalence of HPV oncogenic infections was high and linked to sexual behavior. Strategies to reduce the burden of oncogenic HPV infection, such as prophylactic vaccination programs, are likely to impact the burden of disease due to cervical precancer and cancer.
International journal of gynecological pathology: official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists 03/2011; 30(2):173-84. · 2.07 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We report efficacy and immunogenicity of the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine up to 7.3 years post-vaccination. The study was conducted in a population (N=433) of women enrolled in Brazilian centres from an initial placebo-controlled study. Women were aged 15-25 years at first vaccination. During the most recent year of follow-up, approximately 7 years after initial vaccination, no cases of infection or cytohistological lesions associated with HPV-16/18 were observed in the vaccinees. Vaccine efficacy (95% confidence interval) up to 7.3 years was 94.5% (82.9, 98.9) for incident infection, 100% (55.7, 100) for 12-month persistent infection and 100% (-129.8, 100) for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+. Antibody titres for total IgG and neutralising antibodies remained several folds above natural infection levels and >or=96% of women were seropositive. Vaccine safety was similar to placebo. This is the longest follow-up study for a licensed cervical cancer vaccine.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This observer-blind study compared the prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) and Gardasil (Merck), by assessing immunogenicity and safety through one month after completion of the three-dose vaccination course. Women (n = 1106) were stratified by age (18-26, 27-35, 36-45 years) and randomized (1:1) to receive Cervarix (Months 0, 1, 6) or Gardasil (Months 0, 2, 6). At Month 7 after first vaccination, all women in the according-to-protocol cohort who were seronegative/DNA negative before vaccination for the HPV type analyzed had seroconverted for HPV-16 and HPV-18 serum neutralizing antibodies, as measured by pseudovirion-based neutralization assay (PBNA), except for two women aged 27-35 years in the Gardasil group who did not seroconvert for HPV-18 (98%). Geometric mean titers of serum neutralizing antibodies ranged from 2.3-4.8-fold higher for HPV-16 and 6.8-9.1-fold higher for HPV-18 after vaccination with Cervarix compared with Gardasil, across all age strata. In the total vaccinated cohort (all women who received at least one vaccine dose, regardless of their serological and DNA status prior to vaccination), Cervarix induced significantly higher serum neutralizing antibody titers in all age strata (p < 0.0001). Positivity rates for anti-HPV-16 and -18 neutralizing antibodies in cervicovaginal secretions and circulating HPV-16 and -18 specific memory B-cell frequencies were also higher after vaccination with Cervarix compared with Gardasil. Both vaccines were generally well tolerated. The incidence of unsolicited adverse events was comparable between vaccinated groups. The incidence of solicited symptoms was generally higher after Cervarix, injection site reactions being most common. However, compliance rates with the three-dose schedules were similarly high (>or= 84%) for both vaccines. Although the importance of differences in magnitude of immune response between these vaccines is unknown, they may represent determinants of duration of protection against HPV-16/18. Long-term studies evaluating duration of efficacy after vaccination are needed for both vaccines.
Human vaccines 11/2009; 5(10):705-19. · 3.14 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We analyzed data from a cohort of 553 women enrolled in the placebo arm of a randomized controlled trial of the human papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 vaccine to study the timing of the occurrence of squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) following incident HPV infection and its relation to persistence of the infection.
At entry, women were cytologically negative, HPV 16/18 seronegative, and high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) DNA negative. Cervicovaginal samples were initially collected at 3-month and cervical samples at 6-month intervals. We estimated the mean time to SIL/CIN, relative risks of SIL/CIN following incident HPV, and odds ratios between persistent HPV and SIL/CIN.
The mean time for SIL/CIN detection was 43.3 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 36.4-50.1] and 46.4 (95% CI, 42.0-50.7) months from first infection with HPV 16/18 and other HR-HPVs, respectively. Relative risks of SIL/CIN following incident HPV infection were 66.2 (95% CI, 14.9-295.1) for HPV 16/18 and 50.9 (95% CI, 11.5-225.4) for other HR-HPVs. The odds ratios of SIL/CIN for persistent HPV 16/18 infection, defined as a minimum of two and three (6 monthly) visits, were, respectively, 169.0 (95% CI, 37.2-768.6) and 169.1 (95% CI, 31.5-907.4). The majority of women with cervical infection with HPV 16/18 lasting >6 months (33 of 51, 65%) developed SIL and/or CIN.
These analyses provide the first actuarial estimate of mean time between incident HR-HPV infection in previously uninfected women and onset of cervical lesion development. Persistent HR-HPV infection, particularly HPV 16/18, is a strong predictor of cervical lesion risk and potentially a reliable end point for clinical HPV research.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The need for developing a case definition and guidelines for a local reaction at or near the injection site, methods for the development of the case definition and guidelines as an adverse event following immunization as well as the rationale for selected decisions about the case definition for a local reaction at or near the injection site are explained in the Preamble section. The case definition is structured in 2 levels of diagnostic certainty: level 1 includes any description of morphological or physiological change at or near the injection site that is described or identified by a healthcare provider. Level 2 is any description of morphological or physiological change at or near injection site that is described by any other person. In Guidelines section, the working group recommends to enable meaningful and standardized data collection, analysis, and presentation of information about a local reaction at or near the injection site. However, implementation of all guidelines might not be possible in all settings. The availability of information may vary depending upon resources, geographic region, and whether the source of information is a prospectively designed clinical trial, a post-marketing surveillance or epidemiologic study, or an individual report of a local reaction at injection site.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Combination vaccines represent one solution to the problem of increased numbers of injections during single clinic visits. A combined DTaP-IPV (Infanrix-IPV) vaccine has been developed for use as a pre-school booster. Four hundred healthy children aged 4-6 years previously primed with 4 doses of DTaP vaccine (Infanrix), 3 doses of poliovirus vaccine and 1 dose of MMR vaccine were randomized to receive single doses of either the combined DTaP-IPV vaccine or separate DTaP and IPV vaccines in a Phase II trial (DTaP-IPV-047). All children also received a second dose of MMR vaccine. Immunogenicity was assessed in serum samples taken before and 1 month after booster administration. Safety was actively assessed for 42 days post-vaccination. Non-inferiority of the DTaP-IPV vaccine to separate DTaP and IPV vaccines was demonstrated for all DTaP antigen booster response rates and poliovirus geometric mean titers of antibody ratios. Post-vaccination, > or =99.4% of children in both groups had seroprotective levels of anti-diphtheria and anti-tetanus antibodies (> or =0.1IU/mL) and seroprotective anti-poliovirus antibody titers (> or =1:8). All children in both groups were seropositive for measles, mumps and rubella antibodies, with similar post-vaccination geometric mean concentrations/titers. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of solicited local or general symptoms, unsolicited symptoms and serious adverse events between the two groups. This combined DTaP-IPV appeared safe and immunogenic when given as a booster dose at 4-6 years of age. The DTaP-IPV vaccine had no negative effect on the response to co-administered MMR vaccine, making it well-suited for use as a pre-school booster.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The incidence of local reactions to diphtheria-, tetanus and acellular pertussis (DTaP-) vaccines in infants and toddlers increases with each subsequent dose, and entire thigh swellings (ETS) have been reported. Lowering the amount of antigen or of adjuvant may decrease the reactogenicity of DTaP while maintaining a protective immune response.
Following priming with three doses of a DTaP vaccine during infancy, the safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity of nine different candidate DTaP-vaccines with reduced amounts of antigen and/or adjuvant given as fourth (booster) dose were evaluated.
Study participants were healthy infants aged 15-27 months at the time of booster vaccination. Each participant had received three doses of a DTaP vaccine (Infanrixtrade mark, GlaxoSmithKline, Rixensart, Belgium; "reference DTaP") at age 3, 4, and 5 months as part of a previous clinical trial. More than 20,000 children were eligible for participation in the current study protocol at the time. In a first phase at a University hospital-based vaccination study center, nine sequential cohorts of 63-119 study subjects received one of nine different candidate vaccines. Patients and study personal were blinded with regard to which vaccine was currently in use. Reactogenicity was solicited from parents using diary cards. Blood was drawn prior to and 4 weeks after vaccination and immediately centrifuged. The serum was stored at -20 degrees C until serology was performed by ELISA tests. As soon as the first candidate vaccine with adequate reactogenicity and immunogenicity profile was identified in the first study phase, a second study phase was initiated in parallel, to evaluate the safety and reactogenicity of the respective candidate vaccine in private practices in large cohorts (1613-2095 study subjects per group).
In the first study phase, DTaP with no aluminum induced the highest frequency of ETS and fever. All other candidate vaccines caused lower rates of local and general reactions than the reference DTaP. As a general rule, vaccines with less antigen induced fewer reactions, although there was no strict dose-response effect and the difference, e.g. between a one-tenth and a one-fifth DTaP dose (DTaP 1/5; DTaP 1/10) was not clinically relevant. Separate injections of Td and aP caused fewer general reactions than the respective TdaP combination and local reactions were higher at the aP than at the Td injection site. Again, as a general rule, reduced amounts of antigen induced lower antibody concentrations, although all vaccines induced "protective" anti-tetanus and anti-diphtheria antibody responses. A total of 92-100% of children showed seroresponses to pertussis antigens even when vaccinated with reduced amounts of the respective pertussis antigen. Elimination of aluminum from DTaP vaccine induced higher anti-tetanus-antibody concentrations and so did a reduction of the amount of diphtheria antigen. Additional examples for antigen interaction were increased antibody concentrations, observed with injection of Td and aP into different limbs. In the second study phase, all three vaccines evaluated (one with a reduced amount of diphtheria antigen, TdaP; one with reduced amounts of all antigens, tdap; and one with a fifth dose of the reference vaccine (DTaP 1/5)) were safe and had an acceptable reactogenicity profile in a total of 4871 study subjects.
Local reactions due to DTaP booster doses in the second year of life can be reduced by reducing the amount of antigen in the respective vaccine while an adequate immunogenicity is maintained. Aluminum-free vaccines induced ETS and fever most commonly. Any changes in vaccine composition should lead to a full evaluation of the new product.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Effective vaccination against HPV 16 and HPV 18 to prevent cervical cancer will require a high level of sustained protection against infection and precancerous lesions. Our aim was to assess the long-term efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of a bivalent HPV-16/18 L1 virus-like particle AS04 vaccine against incident and persistent infection with HPV 16 and HPV 18 and their associated cytological and histological outcomes.
We did a follow-up study of our multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial reported in 2004. We included women who originally received all three doses of bivalent HPV-16/18 virus-like particle AS04 vaccine (0.5 mL; n=393) or placebo (n=383). We assessed HPV DNA, using cervical samples, and did yearly cervical cytology assessments. We also studied the long-term immunogenicity and safety of the vaccine.
More than 98% seropositivity was maintained for HPV-16/18 antibodies during the extended follow-up phase. We noted significant vaccine efficacy against HPV-16 and HPV-18 endpoints: incident infection, 96.9% (95% CI 81.3-99.9); persistent infection: 6 month definition, 94.3 (63.2-99.9); 12 month definition, 100% (33.6-100). In a combined analysis of the initial efficacy and extended follow-up studies, vaccine efficacy of 100% (42.4-100) against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) lesions associated with vaccine types. We noted broad protection against cytohistological outcomes beyond that anticipated for HPV 16/18 and protection against incident infection with HPV 45 and HPV 31. The vaccine has a good long-term safety profile.
Up to 4.5 years, the HPV-16/18 L1 virus-like particle AS04 vaccine is highly immunogenic and safe, and induces a high degree of protection against HPV-16/18 infection and associated cervical lesions. There is also evidence of cross protection.
The Lancet 05/2006; 367(9518):1247-55. · 39.06 Impact Factor