Comparison of the immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 vaccine and the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine for oncogenic non-vaccine types HPV-31 and HPV-45 in healthy women aged 18-45 years

Mark H. Einstein, Mira Baron, Myron J. Levin, Archana Chatterjee, Bradley Fox, Sofia Scholar, Jeffrey Rosen, Nahida Chakhtoura, Marie Lebacq, Robbert Van Der Most, Philippe Moris, Sandra L. Giannini, Anne Schuind, Sanjoy K. Datta, Dominique Descamps

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

92 Scopus citations

Abstract

Protection against oncogenic non-vaccine types (cross-protection) offered by human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines may provide a significant medical benefit. Available clinical efficacy data suggest the two licensed vaccines [HPV-16/18 vaccine, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals (GSK), and HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine, Merck and Co., Inc.,] differ in terms of protection against oncogenic non-vaccine HPV types -31/45. The immune responses induced by the two vaccines against these two non-vaccine HPV types (cross-reactivity) was compared in an observer-blind study up to Month 24 (18 mo postvaccination), in women HPV DNA-negative and seronegative prior to vaccination for the HPV type analyzed [HPV- 010 (NCT00423046)]. Geometric mean antibody titers (GMTs) measured by pseudovirion-based neutralization assay (PBNA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA ) were similar between vaccines for HPV-31/45. Seropositivity rates for HPV-31 were also similar between vaccines; however, there was a trend for higher seropositivity with the HPV-16/18 vaccine (13.0-16.7%) vs. the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine (0.0-5.0%) for HPV-45 with PBNA, but not ELISA . HPV-31/45 cross-reactive memory B-cell responses were comparable between vaccines. Circulating antigen-specific CD4+ T-cell frequencies were higher for the HPV-16/18 vaccine than the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine {HPV-31 [geometric mean ratio (GMR) = 2.0; p = 0.0002] and HPV-45 [GMR = 2.6; p = 0.0092]}, as were the proportion of T-cell responders (HPV-31, p = 0.0009; HPV-45, p = 0.0793). In conclusion, immune response to oncogenic non-vaccine HPV types -31/45 was generally similar for both vaccines with the exception of T-cell response which was higher with the HPV-16/18 vaccine. Considering the differences in cross-protective efficacy between the two vaccines, the results might provide insights into the underlying mechanism(s) of protection.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1359-1373
Number of pages15
JournalHuman Vaccines
Volume7
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2011

Keywords

  • Cervarix®
  • Cervical cancer
  • Cross-protection
  • Gardasil®
  • HPV-31
  • HPV-45
  • Human papillomavirus
  • Immunogenicity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of the immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 vaccine and the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine for oncogenic non-vaccine types HPV-31 and HPV-45 in healthy women aged 18-45 years'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Einstein, M. H., Baron, M., Levin, M. J., Chatterjee, A., Fox, B., Scholar, S., Rosen, J., Chakhtoura, N., Lebacq, M., Van Der Most, R., Moris, P., Giannini, S. L., Schuind, A., Datta, S. K., & Descamps, D. (2011). Comparison of the immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 vaccine and the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine for oncogenic non-vaccine types HPV-31 and HPV-45 in healthy women aged 18-45 years. Human Vaccines, 7(12), 1359-1373. https://doi.org/10.4161/hv.7.12.18282