Explore the vast range of titles available.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is one of the most common sexually transmitted infections. However, only a small percentage of high-risk (HR) HPV infections progress to cervical precancer and cancer. In this study, we investigated the role of the cervicovaginal microbiome (CVM) in the natural history of HR-HPV. This study was nested within the placebo arm of the Costa Rica HPV Vaccine Trial that included women aged 18-25 years of age. Cervical samples from two visits of women with an incident HR-HPV infection (n = 273 women) were used to evaluate the prospective role of the CVM on the natural history of HR-HPV. We focus specifically on infection clearance, persistence, and progression to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and 3 (CIN2+). The CVM was characterized by amplification and sequencing the bacterial 16S V4 rRNA gene region and the fungal ITS1 region using an Illumina MiSeq platform. OTU clustering was performed using QIIME2. Functional groups were imputed using PICRUSt and statistical analyses were performed using R. At Visit 1 (V1) abundance of Lactobacillus iners was associated with clearance of incident HR-HPV infections (Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA)>4.0), whereas V1 Gardnerella was the dominant biomarker for HR-HPV progression (LDA>4.0). At visit 2 (V2), increased microbial Shannon diversity was significantly associated with progression to CIN2+ (p = 0.027). Multivariate mediation analysis revealed that the positive association of V1 Gardnerella with CIN2+ progression was due to the increased cervicovaginal diversity at V2 (p = 0.040). A full multivariate model of key components of the CVM showed significant protective effects via V1 genus Lactobacillus, OR = 0.41 (0.22-0.79), V1 fungal diversity, OR = 0.90 (0.82-1.00) and V1 functional Cell Motility pathway, OR = 0.75 (0.62-0.92), whereas V2 bacterial diversity, OR = 1.19 (1.03-1.38) was shown to be predictive of progression to CIN2+. This study demonstrates that features of the cervicovaginal microbiome are associated with HR-HPV progression in a prospective longitudinal cohort. The analyses indicated that the association of Gardnerella and progression to CIN2+ may actually be mediated by subsequent elevation of microbial diversity. Identified features of the microbiome associated with HR-HPV progression may be targets for therapeutic manipulation to prevent CIN2+. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00128661.

Tests for the DNA of high-risk types of human papillomavirus (HPV) have a higher sensitivity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) than does cytological testing, but the necessity of such testing in cervical screening has been debated. Our aim was to determine whether the effectiveness of cervical screening improves when HPV DNA testing is implemented. Women aged 29–56 years who were participating in the regular cervical screening programme in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to combined cytological and HPV DNA testing or to conventional cytological testing only. After 5 years, combined cytological and HPV DNA testing were done in both groups. The primary outcome measure was the number of CIN3+ lesions detected. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN20781131. 8575 women in the intervention group and 8580 in the control group were recruited, followed up for sufficient time (≥6·5 years), and met eligibility criteria for our analyses. More CIN3+ lesions were detected at baseline in the intervention group than in the control group (68/8575 vs 40/8580, 70% increase, 95% CI 15–151; p=0·007). The number of CIN3+ lesions detected in the subsequent round was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (24/8413 vs 54/8456, 55% decrease, 95% CI 28–72; p=0·001). The number of CIN3+ lesions over the two rounds did not differ between groups. The implementation of HPV DNA testing in cervical screening leads to earlier detection of CIN3+ lesions. Earlier detection of such lesions could permit an extension of the screening interval.

Oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infections cause most cases of cervical cancer. Here, we report long-term follow-up results for the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (publicly funded and initiated before licensure of the HPV vaccines), with the aim of assessing the efficacy of the bivalent HPV vaccine for preventing HPV 16/18-associated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). Women aged 18–25 years were enrolled in a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial in Costa Rica, between June 28, 2004, and Dec 21, 2005, designed to assess the efficacy of a bivalent vaccine for the prevention of infection with HPV 16/18 and associated precancerous lesions at the cervix. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an HPV 16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine or control hepatitis A vaccine. Vaccines were administered intramuscularly in three 0·5 mL doses at 0, 1, and 6 months and participants were followed up annually for 4 years. After the blinded phase, women in the HPV vaccine group were invited to enrol in the long-term follow-up study, which extended follow-up for 7 additional years. The control group received HPV vaccine and was replaced with a new unvaccinated control group. Women were followed up every 2 years until year 11. Investigators and patients were aware of treatment allocation for the follow-up phase. At each visit, clinicians collected cervical cells from sexually active women for cytology and HPV testing. Women with abnormal cytology were referred to colposcopy, biopsy, and treatment as needed. Women with negative results at the last screening visit (year 11) exited the long-term follow-up study. The analytical cohort for vaccine efficacy included women who were HPV 16/18 DNA-negative at vaccination. The primary outcome of this analysis was defined as histopathologically confirmed CIN2+ or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse associated with HPV 16/18 cervical infection detected at colposcopy referral. We calculated vaccine efficacy by year and cumulatively. This long-term follow-up study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00867464. 7466 women were enrolled in the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial; 3727 received the HPV vaccine and 3739 received the control vaccine. Between March 30, 2009, and July 5, 2012, 2635 women in the HPV vaccine group and 2836 women in the new unvaccinated control group were enrolled in the long-term follow-up study. 2635 women in the HPV vaccine group and 2677 women in the control group were included in the analysis cohort for years 0–4, and 2073 women from the HPV vaccine group and 2530 women from the new unvaccinated control group were included in the analysis cohort for years 7–11. Median follow-up time for the HPV group was 11·1 years (IQR 9·1–11·7), 4·6 years (4·3–5·3) for the original control group, and 6·2 years (5·5–6·9) for the new unvaccinated control group. At year 11, vaccine efficacy against incident HPV 16/18-associated CIN2+ was 100% (95% CI 89·2–100·0); 34 (1·5%) of 2233 unvaccinated women had a CIN2+ outcome compared with none of 1913 women in the HPV group. Cumulative vaccine efficacy against HPV 16/18-associated CIN2+ over the 11-year period was 97·4% (95% CI 88·0–99·6). Similar protection was observed against HPV 16/18-associated CIN3—specifically at year 11, vaccine efficacy was 100% (95% CI 78·8–100·0) and cumulative vaccine efficacy was 94·9% (73·7–99·4). During the long-term follow-up, no serious adverse events occurred that were deemed related to the HPV vaccine. The most common grade 3 or worse serious adverse events were pregnancy, puerperium, and perinatal conditions (in 255 [10%] of 2530 women in the unvaccinated control group and 201 [10%] of 2073 women in the HPV vaccine group). Four women in the unvaccinated control group and three in the HPV vaccine group died; no deaths were deemed to be related to the HPV vaccine. The bivalent HPV vaccine has high efficacy against HPV 16/18-associated precancer for more than a decade after initial vaccination, supporting the notion that invasive cervical cancer is preventable. US National Cancer Institute.

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.

The quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine is effective in preventing infection and disease related to HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18. This phase 3 trial involving 14,000 women reports the efficacy of a 9-valent vaccine that targets additional HPV types. The human papillomavirus (HPV) causes premalignant and malignant lesions of the cervix, 1 , 2 vagina, 3 , 4 vulva, 4 , 5 anus, 4 , 6 penis, 7 and oropharynx, 8 as well as genital warts. 9 , 10 The recent development of prophylactic vaccines directed against the most relevant disease-causing HPV types has helped to prevent diseases related to HPV. 11 In clinical trials, the bivalent HPV viruslike particle vaccine against HPV types 16 and 18 was efficacious against related infection with these types and against cervical dysplasia, 12 and the quadrivalent HPV viruslike particle vaccine against types 6, 11, 16, and 18 was efficacious against related infection and against cervical, vaginal, . . .

Cryotherapy is standard practice for treating patients with cervical precancer in see-and-treat programmes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Because of logistical difficulties with cryotherapy (eg, the necessity, costs, and supply chain difficulties of refrigerant gas; equipment failure; and treatment duration >10 min), a battery-operated thermal ablator that is lightweight and portable has been developed. We aimed to compare thermal ablation using the new device with cryotherapy. We report the pilot phase of a randomised controlled trial in routine screen-and-treat clinics providing cervical screening using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) in Lusaka, Zambia. We recruited non-pregnant women, aged 25 years or older, who were eligible for ablative therapy. We randomly assigned participants (1:1:1) to thermal ablation, cryotherapy, or large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ), using computer-generated allocation. The randomisation was concealed but the nurses providing treatment and the participants were unmasked. Thermal ablation was achieved using the Liger thermal ablator (using 1–5 overlapping applications of the probe heated to 100°C, each application lasting for 40 s), cryotherapy was carried out using the double-freeze technique (freeze for 3 min, thaw for 5 min, and freeze again for 3 min), and LLETZ (using a large loop driven by an electro-surgical unit to excise the transformation zone) was done under local anaesthesia. The primary endpoint was treatment success, defined as either human papillomavirus (HPV) type-specific clearance among participants who were positive for the same HPV type at baseline, or a negative VIA test at 6-month follow-up, if the baseline HPV test was negative. Per protocol analyses were done. Enrolment for the full trial is ongoing. Here, we present findings from a prespecified pilot phase of the full trial. The final analysis of the full trial will assess non-inferiority of the groups for the primary efficacy endpoint. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02956239. Between Aug 2, 2017, and Jan 15, 2019, 750 participants were randomly assigned (250 per group). 206 (84%) participants in the cryotherapy group, 197 (81%) in the thermal ablation group, and 204 (84%) in the LLETZ group attended the 6-month follow-up examination. Treatment success was reported in 120 (60%) of 200 participants in the cryotherapy group, 123 (64%) of 192 in the thermal ablation group, and 134 (67%) of 199 in the LLETZ group (p=0·31). Few participants complained of moderate to severe pain in any group immediately after the procedure (six [2%] of 250 in the cryotherapy group, four [2%] of 250 in the thermal ablation group, and five [2%] of 250 in the LLETZ group) and 2 weeks after the procedure (one [<1%] of 241 in the cryotherapy group, none of 242 in the thermal ablation group, and two [<1%] of 237 in the LLETZ group). None of the participants reported any complication requiring medical consultation or admission to hospital. Results from this pilot study preliminarily suggest that thermal ablation has similar treatment success to cryotherapy, without the practical disadvantages of providing cryotherapy in an LMIC. However, the study was not powered to establish the similarity between the techniques, and results from the ongoing randomised controlled trial are need to confirm these results. US National Institutes of Health.

Screening for cervical cancer is not a component of health care in rural India. This article reports on a trial of cervical-cancer screening by human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, cytologic analysis, or visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid in rural villages. The results, as compared with those in a group that received no screening, showed that a single round of HPV testing significantly reduced the incidence of invasive cervical cancer and mortality in rural Indian villages. A trial in rural Indian villages of cervical-cancer screening by human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, cytologic analysis, or visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid showed that a single round of HPV testing significantly reduced the incidence of invasive cervical cancer and mortality. In developing countries, there is a lack of effective screening programs for cervical cancer. In these countries, no clinically significant reduction in the incidence of cervical cancer has occurred during the past three decades. 1 – 4 In developed countries, by contrast, there has been a major decline in cervical-cancer mortality after the introduction of large-scale cytologic testing. The limited success of such screening in developing countries has stimulated evaluation of testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) and visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid (VIA). In October 1999, we initiated a cluster-randomized, controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a single . . .

Despite preventive vaccines for oncogenic human papillomaviruses (HPVs), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is common, and current treatments are ablative and can lead to long-term reproductive morbidity. We assessed whether VGX-3100, synthetic plasmids targeting HPV-16 and HPV-18 E6 and E7 proteins, delivered by electroporation, would cause histopathological regression in women with CIN2/3. Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of VGX-3100 were assessed in CIN2/3 associated with HPV-16 and HPV-18, in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b study. Patients from 36 academic and private gynaecology practices in seven countries were randomised (3:1) to receive 6 mg VGX-3100 or placebo (1 mL), given intramuscularly at 0, 4, and 12 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age (<25 vs ≥25 years) and CIN2 versus CIN3 by computer-generated allocation sequence (block size 4). Funder and site personnel, participants, and pathologists were masked to treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was regression to CIN1 or normal pathology 36 weeks after the first dose. Per-protocol and modified intention-to-treat analyses were based on patients receiving three doses without protocol violations, and on patients receiving at least one dose, respectively. The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01304524) and EudraCT (number 2012-001334-33). Between Oct 19, 2011, and July 30, 2013, 167 patients received either VGX-3100 (n=125) or placebo (n=42). In the per-protocol analysis 53 (49·5%) of 107 VGX-3100 recipients and 11 (30·6%) of 36 placebo recipients had histopathological regression (percentage point difference 19·0 [95% CI 1·4–36·6]; p=0·034). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis 55 (48·2%) of 114 VGX-3100 recipients and 12 (30·0%) of 40 placebo recipients had histopathological regression (percentage point difference 18·2 [95% CI 1·3–34·4]; p=0·034). Injection-site reactions occurred in most patients, but only erythema was significantly more common in the VGX-3100 group (98/125, 78·4%) than in the placebo group (24/42, 57·1%; percentage point difference 21·3 [95% CI 5·3–37·8]; p=0·007). VGX-3100 is the first therapeutic vaccine to show efficacy against CIN2/3 associated with HPV-16 and HPV-18. VGX-3100 could present a non-surgical therapeutic option for CIN2/3, changing the treatment outlook for this common disease. Inovio Pharmaceuticals.

Primary analyses of a study in young women aged 16–26 years showed efficacy of the nine-valent human papillomavirus (9vHPV; HPV 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58) vaccine against infections and disease related to HPV 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58, and non-inferior HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 antibody responses when compared with quadrivalent HPV (qHPV; HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18) vaccine. We aimed to report efficacy of the 9vHPV vaccine for up to 6 years following first administration and antibody responses over 5 years. We undertook this randomised, double-blind, efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety study of the 9vHPV vaccine study at 105 study sites in 18 countries. Women aged 16–26 years old who were healthy, with no history of abnormal cervical cytology, no previous abnormal cervical biopsy results, and no more than four lifetime sexual partners were randomly assigned (1:1) by central randomisation and block sizes of 2 and 2 to receive three intramuscular injections over 6 months of 9vHPV or qHPV (control) vaccine. All participants, study investigators, and study site personnel, laboratory staff, members of the sponsor's study team, and members of the adjudication pathology panel were masked to vaccination groups. The primary outcomes were incidence of high-grade cervical disease (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3, adenocarcinoma in situ, invasive cervical carcinoma), vulvar disease (vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3, vulvar cancer), and vaginal disease (vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3, vaginal cancer) related to HPV 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 and non-inferiority (excluding a decrease of 1·5 times) of anti-HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 geometric mean titres (GMT). Tissue samples were adjudicated for histopathology diagnosis and tested for HPV DNA. Serum antibody responses were assessed by competitive Luminex immunoassay. The primary evaluation of efficacy was a superiority analysis in the per-protocol efficacy population, supportive efficacy was analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, and the primary evaluation of immunogenicity was a non-inferiority analysis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00543543. Between Sept 26, 2007, and Dec 18, 2009, we recruited and randomly assigned 14 215 participants to receive 9vHPV (n=7106) or qHPV (n=7109) vaccine. In the per-protocol population, the incidence of high-grade cervical, vulvar and vaginal disease related to HPV 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 was 0·5 cases per 10 000 person-years in the 9vHPV and 19·0 cases per 10 000 person-years in the qHPV groups, representing 97·4% efficacy (95% CI 85·0–99·9). HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 GMTs were non-inferior in the 9vHPV versus qHPV group from month 1 to 3 years after vaccination. No clinically meaningful differences in serious adverse events were noted between the study groups. 11 participants died during the study follow-up period (six in the 9vHPV vaccine group and five in the qHPV vaccine group); none of the deaths were considered vaccine-related. The 9vHPV vaccine prevents infection, cytological abnormalities, high-grade lesions, and cervical procedures related to HPV 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. Both the 9vHPV vaccine and qHPV vaccine had a similar immunogenicity profile with respect to HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18. Vaccine efficacy was sustained for up to 6 years. The 9vHPV vaccine could potentially provide broader coverage and prevent 90% of cervical cancer cases worldwide. Merck & Co, Inc.