BACKGROUND: A prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine targeting oncogenic HPV types in addition to HPV-16 and -18 may broaden protection against cervical cancer. Two Phase I/II, randomized, controlled studies were conducted to compare the immunogenicity and safety of investigational tetravalent HPV L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines, containing VLPs from two additional oncogenic genotypes, with the licensed HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine (control) in healthy 18-25 year-old women. METHODS: In one trial (NCT00231413), subjects received control or one of 6 tetravalent HPV-16/18/31/45 AS04 vaccine formulations at months (M) 0,1,6. In a second trial (NCT00478621), subjects received control or one of 5 tetravalent HPV-16/18/33/58 vaccines formulated with different adjuvant systems (AS04, AS01 or AS02), administered on different schedules (M0,1,6 or M0,3 or M0,6). RESULTS: One month after the third injection (Month 7), there was a consistent trend for lower anti-HPV-16 and -18 geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs) for tetravalent AS04-adjuvanted vaccines compared with control. GMTs were statistically significantly lower for an HPV-16/18/31/45 AS04 vaccine containing 20/20/10/10 μg VLPs for both anti-HPV-16 and anti-HPV-18 antibodies, and for an HPV-16/18/33/58 AS04 vaccine containing 20/20/20/20 μg VLPs for anti-HPV-16 antibodies. There was also a trend for lower HPV-16 and -18-specific memory B-cell responses for tetravalent AS04 vaccines versus control. No such trends were observed for CD4(+) T-cell responses. Immune interference could not always be overcome by increasing the dose of HPV-16/18 L1 VLPs or by using a different adjuvant system. All formulations had acceptable reactogenicity and safety profiles. Reactogenicity in the 7-day post-vaccination period tended to increase with the introduction of additional VLPs, especially for formulations containing AS01. CONCLUSIONS: HPV-16 and -18 antibody responses were lower when additional HPV L1 VLPs were added to the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine. Immune interference is a complex phenomenon that cannot always be overcome by changing the antigen dose or adjuvant system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Damme et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: