Cervarix® and Gardasil®, 2 human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, have been approved and implemented globally in young adolescent women with the hope of reducing the incidence of cervical cancer several decades hence. This program is dependent on the concept of ‘immunobridging’: antibody titers generated in young adolescents that are the same or higher than generated in HPV-naive 16- to 26-year-old women, the population in which efficacy is proven. Likewise, realizing a decline in cervical cancer from young adolescent female vaccination depends on the duration of vaccine efficacy, and the population coverage reached. While we patiently wait for results from our young adolescent vaccination programs, newly released data indicates that the immunogenicity and efficacy of the vaccines for young adult women with prior HPV exposure is equal or superior to that seen for young adolescents. This same concept of immunobridging supported by limited efficacy data offers the potential to reduce cervical cancer precursors within just a few years in our young sexually active adult women, a population secondary to our young adolescents. The HPV vaccines are not therapeutic. Neither vaccine will inhibit an already HPV-infected basal epithelial cell which continues to transform differentiated epithelial layers into cervical dysplasias. There is a clinical hope, though, already supported by early data, that the vaccines are capable of neutralizing HPV virions in host tissues from both auto-inoculated infections and infections in other organs than the cervix, thereby making it possible for these vaccines to prevent less common HPV-associated cancers of the penis, vagina, vulva, anus, oral cavity and oro-pharynx. Both vaccines have been shown to be generally safe in the phase II and phase III randomized controlled trials over 3–6.4 years. Post-marketing surveillance of Cervarix and Gardasil continues to show that they are safe for most women despite rarely occurring serious events.

Keywords:
Vaccine, HPV, safety, Vaccine, HPV, efficacy, Immunogenicity, Cervical cancer, Cervical dysplasia, Vulvovaginal dysplasia
1.
Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P: Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:74–108.
2.
de Sanjose S, Tous S, on behalf of RIS HPV TT study group: Worldwide HPV genotype distribution in 10,289 cases of cervical cancer. 24th Intl Papillomavirus Conf, Beijing, November 2007.
3.
Castellsagué X, Bosch FX, Muñoz N, et al: Male circumcision, penile human papillomavirus infection, and cervical cancer in female partners. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1105–1112.
4.
Joura EA, Leodolter S, Hernandez-Avila M, et al: Efficacy of a quadrivalent prophylactic human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like-particle vaccine against high-grade vulval and vaginal lesions: a combined analysis of three randomised clinical trials. Lancet 2007;369:1693–1702.
6.
Harper DM, Franco EL, Wheeler CM, et al. for the GlaxoSmithKline HPV Vaccine Study Group: Efficacy of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine in prevention of infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;364:1757–1765.
7.
Villa LL, Costa RL, Petta CA, et al: Prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine in young women: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre phase II efficacy trial. Lancet Oncol 2005;6:271–278.
8.
Harper DM: High and sustained protection up to 6.4 years with GSK’s AS04 adjuvanted cervical cancer vaccine. SocGynecologic Oncol Meet, Tampa, March 2008.
9.
Olsson SE, Villa LL, Costa RLR, et al: Induction of immune memory following administration of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine. Vaccine 2007;2:4931–4939.
10.
Clifford G, Smith JS, Aguado T, Franceschi S: Comparison of HPV type distribution in high-grade cervical lesions and cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 2003;89:101–105.
11.
Koutsky LA for the FUTURE II Study Group: Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1915–1927.
12.
Garland SM, Hernandez-Avila M, Wheeler CM, et al: Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent anogenital diseases. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1928–1943.
13.
Harper DM, Franco EL, Wheeler CM, et al. for the GlaxoSmithKline HPV Vaccine Study Group: Sustained efficacy up to 4·5 years of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine against human papillomavirus types 16 and 18: follow-up from a randomised control trial. Lancet 2006;367:1247–1255.
14.
Kalliala I, Anttila A, Pukkala E, Nieminen P: Risk of cervical and other cancers after treatment of CIN. BMJ 2005;331:1183–1185.
15.
Hildesheim A, Herrero R, Wacholder S, Rodriguez AC, Solomon D, Bratti MC, Schiller JT, Gonzalez P, Dubin G, Porras C, Jimenez SE, Lowy DR: Costa Rican HPV Vaccine Trial Group: Effect of human papillomavirus 16/18 L1 virus-like particle vaccine among young women with preexisting infection: a randomized trial. JAMA 2007;298:743–753.
16.
Paavonen J, Jenkins D, Bosch FX, et al: Efficacy of a prophylactic adjuvanted bivalent L1 virus-like-particle vaccine against infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: an interim analysis of a phase III double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:2161–2170.
17.
Cruickshank M, Teixeira J, Gall S, et al: Efficacy and safety for GSK’s HPV vaccine in women initially seropositive or seronegative for HPV 16/18 in a phase III trial. EuroGin, Monte Carlo, October 2007.
18.
Kim D, Gambhira R, Karanama B, et al: Generation and characterization of a preventive and therapeutic HPV DNA vaccine. Vaccine 2008;26:351–360.
19.
Garcea RL: New vaccines for the prevention and treatment of human papillomavirus infection. EuroGin Nice, 2008.
20.
Winer RL, Kiviat NB, Hughes JP, Adam DE, Lee SK, Kuypers JM, Koutsky LA: Development and duration of human papillomavirus lesions, after initial infection. J Infect Dis 2005;191:731–738.
21.
Moscicki AB, Shiboski S, Hills NK, Powell KJ, Jay N, Hanson EN, Miller S, Canjura-Clayton KL, Farhat S, Broering JM, Darragh TM: Regression of low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesions in young women. Lancet 2004;364:1678–1683.
22.
Villa LL, Ault KA, Giuliano AR, et al: Immunologic responses following administration of a vaccine targeting human papillomavirus types 6, 11, 16, and 18. Vaccine 2006;24:5571–5583.
23.
Poland GA, Jacobson RM, Koutsky LA, et al: Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a novel vaccine for human papillomavirus 16: a 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial. Mayo Clin Proc 2005;80:601–610.
24.
Block SL, Nolan T, Sattler C, et al: Comparison of the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine in male and female adolescents and young adult women. Pediatrics 2006;118:2135–2145.
25.
Giannini SL, Hanon E, Moris P, et al: Enhanced humoral and memory B cellular immunity using HPV 16/18 L1 VLP vaccine formulated with the MPL/aluminium salt combination (AS04) compared to aluminium salt only. Vaccine 2006;24:5937–5949.
26.
Caluger A, et al: Quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV4): post licensure safety update. Vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) United States. ACIP meeting, October 2008. www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/acip/slides-oct08.htm#hpv (accessed February 9, 2009).
27.
Brotherton JM, Gold MS, Kemp AS, et al; New South Wales Health HPV Adverse Events Panel: Anaphylaxis following quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccination. CMAJ 2008;179:525–533.
28.
Slade B, et al: Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Network: October 2008 ACIP meeting, October 2008. www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/acip/slides-oct08.htm#hpv (February 9, 2009).
29.
Wheeler CM, Bautista OM, Tomassini JE, et al: Safety and immunogenicity of co-administered quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) -6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like particle (VLP) and hepatitis B (HBV) vaccines. Vaccine 2008;26:686–696.
30.
Schwarz TF, et al: Co-administration of GSK’s AS04 adjuvanted cervical cancer vaccine with combined dTpa-IPV vaccine in girls aged 10–18 years. Presented at ICID, Kuala Lumpur, 2008, 19-026. www.isid.org/downloads/13th_ICID_AbsPosters.pdf (accessed May 18, 2009).
31.
Shaneyfelt TM, Centor RM: Reassessment of clinical practice guidelines: go gently into that good night. JAMA 2009;301:868–869.
32.
Barnabas RV, Laukkanen P, Koskela P, et al: Epidemiology of HPV 16 and cervical cancer in Finland and the potential impact of vaccination: mathematical modelling analyses. PLoS Med 2006;3:e138.
33.
Goldie SJ, Kohli M, Grima D, et al: Projected clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of a human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:604–615.
34.
Kulasingam SL, Myers ER: Potential health and economic impact of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to screening programs. JAMA 2003;290:781–789.
35.
Chesson HW, et al: Cost effectiveness models of HPV vaccines. National STD Prevention Conference, May 2006.
36.
Kim JJ, Goldie SJ: Health and economic implications of HPV vaccination in the United States. N Engl J Med 2008;359:821–832.
37.
Edgren G, Sparén P: Risk of anogenital cancer after diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a prospective population-based study. Lancet Oncol 2007;8:311–316.
38.
Ault KA for The Future II Study Group: Effect of prophylactic human papillomavirus L1 virus-like-particle vaccine on risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2, grade 3, and adenocarcinoma in situ: a combined analysis of four randomised clinical trials. Lancet 2007;369:1861–1868.
39.
Harper DM: Bivalent Vaccine. EuroGin, Monte Carlo, October 2007.
40.
Wheeler CM for the HPV Vaccine Study Group: High and sustained HPV-16 and 18 antibody levels through 6.4 years in women vaccinated with Cervarix™ (GSK HPV-16/18 AS04 vaccine). Presented at: ESPID, Graz, May 2008. www.kenes.com/espid2008/program/search.asp (accessed February 9, 2009).
41.
Paavonen J for the HPV PATRICIA Study Group: Final phase III efficacy analysis of Cervarix in young women. Presented at IPV Malmo, Sweden, May 2009, O-29.06.
42.
Skinner R for HPV PATRICIA Study Group: Cross-protective efficacy of Cervarix against oncogenic HPV types beyond HPV 16/18. Presented at IPV, Malmo, Sweden, May 2009, O-29.01.
43.
Einstein MH for the HPV 010 Study Group: Immune response after primary vaccination course: A comparative trial of two HPV prophylactic vaccines. Presented at IPV, Malmo, Sweden, May 2009, O-01.02.
44.
Muñoz N, Manalastas R Jr, Pitisuttithum P, et al: Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, 18) recombinant vaccine in women aged 24–45 years: a randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet 2009;373:1949–1958.
45.
Rodriguez A for NCI Guanacaste Cohort study: Imputed global vaccination benefit by key risk predictors. Presented at IPV, Malmo, Sweden, May 2009, O-01.05.
46.
Brown DR et al: The impact of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV; types 6, 11, 16, 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine on infection and disease due to oncogenic nonvaccine HPV types in generally HPV-naive women aged 16–26 years. J Infect Dis 2009; 199:926–935.
47.
Herrero R: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines: Limited cross-protection against additional HPV types. J Infect Dis 2009; 199:919–922.
© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel
2009
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.