Explore the vast range of titles available.

Pelvic inflammatory disease can produce acute symptoms and result in infertility, ectopic pregnancy, and chronic pelvic pain. This review summarizes current approaches to diagnosis and treatment and the future prospects for better prevention strategies. Pelvic inflammatory disease is an infection-induced inflammation of the female upper reproductive tract (the endometrium, fallopian tubes, ovaries, or pelvic peritoneum); it has a wide range of clinical manifestations. 1 Inflammation spreads from the vagina or cervix to the upper genital tract, with endometritis as an intermediate stage in the pathogenesis of disease. 2 The hallmark of the diagnosis is pelvic tenderness combined with inflammation of the lower genital tract; women with pelvic inflammatory disease often have very subtle symptoms and signs. 3 Many women have clinically silent spread of infection to the upper genital tract, which results in subclinical pelvic inflammatory disease. . . .

Bacterial vaginal infections are in two main classes: bacterial vaginosis, associated with a fishy-smelling discharge and increased pH, and desquamative inflammatory vaginitis, also associated with an increased pH. Both conditions increase the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease.

Localized provoked vulvodynia (LPV), also called vulvar vestibulitis or provoked vestibulodynia, is a major cause of dyspareunia that severely impacts sexual health. At the tissue level, lymphocytic inflammation and hyperinnervation are characteristic pathological features, explaining the main symptoms and signs. A recent experimental animal study suggests that the histopathological findings of LPV may be due to mucosal CD4 Th17 immune responses to microbial antigens. We hypothesize that LPV is an immune-mediated inflammatory disease and challenge the concept of LPV as a chronic pain syndrome of unknown cause. Since most treatment modalities currently used in LPV are no better than placebo, we therefore warrant future research investigating the possible presence of CD4 Th17 cells and IL17 cytokine in affected tissues together with treatment trials that include inhibitors of the IL17 pathway.

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) is the surrogate endpoint used in licensure trials of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. Vaccine efficacy against CIN3+, the immediate precursor to invasive cervical cancer, is more difficult to measure because of its lower incidence, but provides the most stringent evidence of potential cancer prevention. We report vaccine efficacy against CIN3+ and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) in the end-of-study analysis of PATRICIA (PApilloma TRIal against Cancer In young Adults). Healthy women aged 15–25 years with no more than six lifetime sexual partners were included in PATRICIA, irrespective of their baseline HPV DNA status, HPV-16 or HPV-18 serostatus, or cytology. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine or a control hepatitis A vaccine via an internet-based central randomisation system using a minimisation algorithm to account for age ranges and study sites. The patients and study investigators were masked to allocated vaccine. The primary endpoint of PATRICIA has been reported previously. In the present end-of-study analysis, we focus on CIN3+ and AIS in the populations of most clinical interest, the total vaccinated cohort (TVC) and the TVC-naive. The TVC comprised all women who received at least one vaccine dose, approximating catch-up populations and including sexually active women (vaccine n=9319; control=9325). The TVC-naive comprised women with no evidence of oncogenic HPV infection at baseline, approximating early adolescent HPV exposure (vaccine n=5824; control=5820). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00122681. Vaccine efficacy against CIN3+ associated with HPV-16/18 was 100% (95% CI 85·5–100) in the TVC-naive and 45·7% (22·9–62·2) in the TVC. Vaccine efficacy against all CIN3+ (irrespective of HPV type in the lesion and including lesions with no HPV DNA detected) was 93·2% (78·9–98·7) in the TVC-naive and 45·6% (28·8–58·7) in the TVC. In the TVC-naive, vaccine efficacy against all CIN3+ was higher than 90% in all age groups. In the TVC, vaccine efficacy against all CIN3+ and CIN3+ associated with HPV-16/18 was highest in the 15–17 year age group and progressively decreased in the 18–20 year and 21–25 year age groups. Vaccine efficacy against all AIS was 100% (31·0–100) and 76·9% (16·0–95·8) in the TVC-naive and TVC, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 835 (9·0%) and 829 (8·9%) women in the vaccine and control groups, respectively; only ten events (0·1%) and five events (0·1%), respectively, were considered to be related to vaccination. PATRICIA end-of-study results show excellent vaccine efficacy against CIN3+ and AIS irrespective of HPV DNA in the lesion. Population-based vaccination that incorporates the HPV-16/18 vaccine and high coverage of early adolescents might have the potential to substantially reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals.

We evaluated the efficacy of the human papillomavirus HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against non-vaccine oncogenic HPV types in the end-of-study analysis after 4 years of follow-up in PATRICIA (PApilloma TRIal against Cancer In young Adults). Healthy women aged 15–25 years with no more than six lifetime sexual partners were included in PATRICIA irrespective of their baseline HPV DNA status, HPV-16 or HPV-18 serostatus, or cytology. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to HPV-16/18 vaccine or a control hepatitis A vaccine, via an internet-based central randomisation system using a minimisation algorithm to account for age ranges and study sites. The study was double-blind. The primary endpoint of PATRICIA has been reported previously; the present analysis evaluates cross-protective vaccine efficacy against non-vaccine oncogenic HPV types in the end-of-study analysis. Analyses were done for three cohorts: the according-to-protocol cohort for efficacy (ATP-E; vaccine n=8067, control n=8047), total vaccinated HPV-naive cohort (TVC-naive; no evidence of infection with 14 oncogenic HPV types at baseline, approximating young adolescents before sexual debut; vaccine n=5824, control n=5820), and the total vaccinated cohort (TVC; all women who received at least one vaccine dose, approximating catch-up populations that include sexually active women; vaccine n=9319, control=9325). Vaccine efficacy was evaluated against 6-month persistent infection, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) associated with 12 non-vaccine HPV types (individually or as composite endpoints), and CIN3+ associated with the composite of 12 non-vaccine HPV types. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00122681. Consistent vaccine efficacy against persistent infection and CIN2+ (with or without HPV-16/18 co-infection) was seen across cohorts for HPV-33, HPV-31, HPV-45, and HPV-51. In the most conservative analysis of vaccine efficacy against CIN2+, where all cases co-infected with HPV-16/18 were removed, vaccine efficacy was noted for HPV-33 in all cohorts, and for HPV-31 in the ATP-E and TVC-naive. Vaccine efficacy against CIN2+ associated with the composite of 12 non-vaccine HPV types (31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 66, and 68), with or without HPV-16/18 co-infection, was 46·8% (95% CI 30·7–59·4) in the ATP-E, 56·2% (37·2–69·9) in the TVC-naive, and 34·2% (20·4–45·8) in the TVC. Corresponding values for CIN3+ were 73·8% (48·3–87·9), 91·4% (65·0–99·0), and 47·5% (22·8–64·8). Data from the end-of-study analysis of PATRICIA show cross-protective efficacy of the HPV-16/18 vaccine against four oncogenic non-vaccine HPV types—HPV-33, HPV-31, HPV-45, and HPV-51—in different trial cohorts representing diverse groups of women. GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals.

Recurrent vulvovaginal candidosis (RVVC) is a chronic, difficult to treat vaginal infection, caused by Candida species, which affects women of all ages and ethnic and social background. A long-term prophylactic maintenance regimen with antifungals is often necessary. In most clinical practice guidelines, oral fluconazole is recommended as the first-line treatment. Although clinical resistance to antifungal agents remains rare, overexposure to azoles may increase the development of fluconazole-resistant C .  albicans strains. In addition, non-albicans Candida species are frequently dose-dependent susceptible or resistant to fluconazole and other azoles, and their prevalence is rising. Available therapeutic options to treat such fluconazole-resistant C. albicans and low susceptibility non- albicans strains are limited. Ten experts from different European countries discussed problematic issues of current RVVC diagnosis and treatment in two audiotaped online sessions and two electronic follow-up rounds. A total of 340 statements were transcribed, summarized, and compared with published evidence. The profile of patients with RVVC, their care pathways, current therapeutic needs, and potential value of novel drugs were addressed. Correct diagnosis, right treatment choice, and patient education to obtain adherence to therapy regimens are crucial for successful RVVC treatment. As therapeutic options are limited, innovative strategies are required. Well- tolerated and effective new drugs with an optimized mechanism of action are desirable and are discussed. Research into the impact of RVVC and treatments on health-related quality of life and sex life is also needed.

Localized provoked vulvodynia (LPV) causes dyspareunia among reproductive aged women. We review the pathogenesis of LPV and suggest that LPV is an inflammatory pain syndrome of the vestibular mucosa triggered by microbial antigens in a susceptible host. Tissue inflammation and hyperinnervation are characteristic findings which explain symptoms and clinical signs. Education of health care providers of LPV is important since this condition is common, often unrecognized, and patients often become frustrated users of health care. Research is needed on the antigen triggers of the syndrome. Randomized clinical trials are needed to evaluate treatment modalities.

The control arm of PATRICIA (PApilloma TRIal against Cancer In young Adults, NCT00122681) was used to investigate the risk of progression from cervical HPV infection to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or clearance of infection, and associated determinants. Women aged 15-25 years were enrolled. A 6-month persistent HPV infection (6MPI) was defined as detection of the same HPV type at two consecutive evaluations over 6 months and clearance as ≥2 type-specific HPV negative samples taken at two consecutive intervals of approximately 6 months following a positive sample. The primary endpoint was CIN grade 2 or greater (CIN2+) associated with the same HPV type as a 6MPI. Secondary endpoints were CIN1+/CIN3+ associated with the same HPV type as a 6MPI; CIN1+/CIN2+/CIN3+ associated with an infection of any duration; and clearance of infection. The analyses included 4825 women with 16,785 infections (3363 women with 6902 6MPIs). Risk of developing a CIN1+/CIN2+/CIN3+ associated with same HPV type as a 6MPI varied with HPV type and was significantly higher for oncogenic versus non-oncogenic types. Hazard ratios for development of CIN2+ were 10.44 (95% CI: 6.96-15.65), 9.65 (5.97-15.60), 5.68 (3.50-9.21), 5.38 (2.87-10.06) and 3.87 (2.38-6.30) for HPV-16, HPV-33, HPV-31, HPV-45 and HPV-18, respectively. HPV-16 or HPV-33 6MPIs had ~25-fold higher risk for progression to CIN3+. Previous or concomitant HPV infection or CIN1+ associated with a different HPV type increased risk. Of the different oncogenic HPV types, HPV-16 and HPV-31 infections were least likely to clear. Cervical infections with oncogenic HPV types increased the risk of CIN2+ and CIN3+. Previous or concomitant infection or CIN1+ also increased the risk. HPV-16 and HPV-33 have by far the highest risk of progression to CIN3+, and HPV-16 and HPV-31 have the lowest chance of clearance.

Vulval and vaginal cancers among younger women are often related to infection with human papillomavirus (HPV). These cancers are preceded by high-grade vulval intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN2–3) and vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VaIN2–3). Our aim was to do a combined analysis of three randomised clinical trials to assess the effect of a prophylactic quadrivalent HPV vaccine on the incidence of these diseases. 18 174 women (16–26 years) were enrolled and randomised to receive either quadrivalent HPV6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like-particle vaccine or placebo at day 1, and months 2 and 6. Individuals underwent detailed anogenital examination at day 1, 1 month after dose three, and at 6–12-month intervals for up to 48 months. Suspect genital lesions were biopsied and read by a panel of pathologists and vaccine HPV type-specific DNA testing was done. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of VIN2–3 or VaIN2–3 associated with HPV16 or HPV18. Primary efficacy analyses were done in a per-protocol population. The mean follow-up time was 3 years. Among women naive to HPV16 or HPV18 through 1 month after dose three (per-protocol population; vaccine n=7811; placebo n=7785), the vaccine was 100% effective (95% CI 72–100) against VIN2–3 or VaIN2–3 associated with HPV16 or HPV18. In the intention-to-treat population (which included 18 174 women who, at day 1, could have been infected with HPV16 or HPV18), vaccine efficacy against VIN2–3 or VaIN2–3 associated with HPV16 or HPV18 was 71% (37–88). The vaccine was 49% (18–69) effective against all VIN2–3 or VaIN2–3, irrespective of whether or not HPV DNA was detected in the lesion. The most common treatment-related adverse event was injection-site pain. Prophylactic administration of quadrivalent HPV vaccine was effective in preventing high-grade vulval and vaginal lesions associated with HPV16 or HPV18 infection in women who were naive to these types before vaccination. With time, such vaccination could result in reduced rates of HPV-related vulval and vaginal cancers.

This controlled trial was conducted in 1484 heterosexual couples in whom one partner had symptomatic genital herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) infection. Daily treatment of the infected partner with valacyclovir was associated with a lower rate of acquisition of HSV-2 by the uninfected partner (1.9 percent, vs. 3.6 percent in the placebo group). When one partner has symptomatic HSV-2 infection, treatment reduces transmission. Herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) causes a chronic genital viral infection characterized by high rates of clinical and subclinical reactivation in the genital mucosa and the attendant risk of sexual transmission. 1 – 4 Both symptomatic and asymptomatic reactivations of HSV infection have been shown to result in sexual transmission. 5 – 8 Population-based studies in the United States indicate that 22 percent of adults have antibodies to HSV-2 and that an estimated 1.6 million new cases of HSV-2 infection are acquired yearly. 9 , 10 HSV-2 has become the most frequent cause of genital ulcer disease in all regions of the world. 11 – 14 Transmission . . .