Systems vaccinology evaluates a new vaccine candidate against HPV-16, suggesting significant immunogenic potential.
Cervical cancer remains a major global health burden, with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), particularly HPV-16, responsible for most cases. While licensed prophylactic HPV vaccines are effective, their type-restricted coverage and lack of therapeutic activity highlight the need for next-generation vaccine strategies. In this study, a systems vaccinology-based approach was used to design a multi-epitope vaccine with both prophylactic and therapeutic potential against HPV-16. Immunodominant epitopes eliciting immune responses from HPV-16 E5, E6, E7, and L2 proteins were identified using immunoinformatics methods. Transcriptomic and pathway enrichment analysis of cervical cancer data sets identified interleukin-17A (IL-17A) signaling as a favorable immune axis, supporting its inclusion as a cytokine adjuvant. Population coverage evaluation demonstrated broad global applicability, with a predicted coverage of 99.98% across MHC class I and II alleles. Among 7 designed constructs, 1 candidate (model D) exhibited favorable physicochemical and structural properties, including high predicted solubility (73%), strong model quality, and antigenic potential. Docking analyses indicated strong correlations between native complexes and the corresponding vaccine-IL-17 receptor A and C complexes (Pearson r = .98 and .88, respectively). Molecular dynamics simulations over 500 ns confirmed structural stability, with favorable MM/PBSA binding free energies (ΔG_total ≈ −31 kJ/mol). Immune response simulations demonstrated activation of CD4 + and CD8 + T-cells, memory B-cell formation, and a predominantly IFN-γ immune response. These findings demonstrate that the proposed construct is a promising HPV-16 vaccine candidate; nevertheless, targeted in vitro and in vivo studies are essential to confirm its immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety prior to further clinical developments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fathi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: