Assessment of immunization regimens of duck Riemerella anatipestifer vaccines.

AIMS: Riemerella anatipestifer infections of goslings and ducklings can result in high mortality. Since there are at least 21 serotypes of R. anatipestifer, cross-protection is an important goal for vaccine development. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this study, we evaluated the immunostimulatory effect of different immunization regimens - the traditional inactivated vaccine vs prime-boost regimens using DNA and protein subunit vaccines (DNA+subunit, subunit+subunit, subunit+inactivated and DNA+DNA). Results showed that, when compared to the inactivated vaccine, prime-boost regimens induced higher and up to 16-week longer lasting levels of antibody responses, significantly elevated the percentage of the cytotoxic CD8+ T cell and higher expression levels of IFN-γ, IL-6 and IL-12 mRNAs. Furthermore, as an indication of cross-protection, sera from prime-boost regimens were able to recognize lysates of R. anatipestifer serotypes 1, 2 and 6. CONCLUSIONS: Prime-boost regimens especially DNA-prime and protein-boost, induce strong long-term immune response and may prove protective for breeder ducks requiring long-term protection. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: It is worth mentioning that the subunit+inactivated regimen group also elicited strong immune response. The cost of this regimen may only be half of the other prime-boost regimens, making this subunit + inactivated combination an attractive option.

Assessment of cross-protection to heterologous strains of Flavobacterium psychrophilum following vaccination with a live-attenuated coldwater disease immersion vaccine.

Bacterial coldwater disease, caused by Flavobacterium psychrophilum, remains one of the most significant bacterial diseases of salmonids worldwide. A previously developed and reported live-attenuated immersion vaccine (F. psychrophilum; B.17-ILM) has been shown to confer significant protection to salmonids. To further characterize this vaccine, a series of experiments were carried out to determine the cross-protective efficacy of this B.17-ILM vaccine against 9 F. psychrophilum isolates (representing seven sequence types/three clonal complexes as determined by multilocus sequence typing) in comparison with a wild-type virulent strain, CSF-259-93. To assess protection, 28-day experimental challenges of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) fry were conducted following immersion vaccinations with the B.17-ILM vaccine. F. psychrophilum strains used in challenge trials were isolated from several fish species across the globe; however, all were found to be virulent in rainbow trout. The B.17-ILM vaccine provided significant protection against all strains, with relative percent survival values ranging from 51% to 72%. All vaccinated fish developed an adaptive immune response (as measured by F. psychrophilum-specific antibodies) that increased out to the time of challenge (8 weeks postimmunization). Previous studies have confirmed that antibody plays an important role in protection against F. psychrophilum challenge; therefore, specific antibodies to the B.17-ILM vaccine strain appear to contribute to the cross-protection observed to heterologous strain. The ability of such antibodies to bind to similar antigenic regions for all strains was confirmed by western blot analyses. Results presented here support the practical application of this live-attenuated vaccine, and suggest that it will be efficacious even in aquaculture operations affected by diverse strains of F. psychrophilum.

Determining the HPV vaccine schedule for a HIV-infected population in sub Saharan Africa, a commentary.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies have established human papillomavirus (HPV) infection as the central cause of invasive cervical cancer (ICC) and its precursor lesions. HIV is associated with a higher prevalence and persistence of a broader range of high-risk HPV genotypes, which in turn results in a higher risk of cervical disease. Recent WHO HPV vaccination schedule recommendations, along with the roll out of HAART at an earlier CD4 count within the female HIV-infected population, may have programmatic implications for sub Saharan Africa. This communication identifies research areas, which will need to be addressed for determining a HPV vaccine schedule for this population in sub Saharan Africa. A review of WHO latest recommendations and the evidence concerning one-dose HPV vaccine schedules was undertaken. CONCLUSION: For females ≥15 years at the time of first dose and immunocompromised and/or HIV-infected, a 3-dose schedule (0, 1-2, 6 months) is recommended for all three vaccines. There is some evidence that there is similar protection against HPV 16 and 18 infection from a single vaccination than from two or three doses, however there is no cross protection conferred to other genotypes. There is a need for periodic prevalence studies to determine the vaccination coverage of bivalent, quadrivalent and nonavalent vaccine targeted oncogenic HPV genotypes in women with CIN 3 or ICC at national level. In light of the increasing number of sub Saharan HIV-infected girls initiating HAART at a CD4 count above 350 mm3, there are a number of clinical, virological and public health research gaps to address before a tailored vaccine schedule can be established for this population.

Assessment of cross-protection induced by a bluetongue virus (BTV) serotype 8 vaccine towards other BTV serotypes in experimental conditions.

Bluetongue disease is caused by bluetongue virus (BTV) and BTV serotype 8 (BTV8) caused great economic damage in Europe during the last decade. From 1998 to 2007, in addition to BTV8, Europe had to face the emergence of BTV1, 2, 4, 9, and 16, spreading in countries where the virus has never been detected before. These unprecedented outbreaks trigger the need to evaluate and compare the clinical, virological and serological features of the European BTV serotypes in the local epidemiological context. In this study groups of calves were infected with one of the following European BTV serotypes, namely BTV1, 2, 4, 9 and 16. For each tested serotype, two groups of three male Holstein calves were used: one group vaccinated against BTV8, the other non-vaccinated. Clinical signs were quantified, viral RNA was detected in blood and organs and serological relationship was assessed. Calves were euthanized 35 days post-infection and necropsied. Most of the infected animals showed mild clinical signs. A partial serological cross reactivity has been reported between BTV8 and BTV4, and between BTV1 and BTV8. BTV2 and BTV4 viral RNA only reached low levels in blood, when compared to other serotypes, whereas in vitro growth assays could not highlight significant differences. Altogether the results of this study support the hypothesis of higher adaptation of some BTV strains to specific hosts, in this case calves. Furthermore, cross-protection resulting from a prior vaccination with BTV8 was highlighted based on cross-neutralization. However, the development of neutralizing antibodies is probably not totally explaining the mild protection induced by the heterologous vaccination.

Comparison of the Impact of Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine 10 or Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine 13 on Invasive Pneumococcal Disease in Equivalent Populations.

Background: Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 10 (PCV10) and pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 13 (PCV13), are used in childhood immunization programs worldwide, but direct comparisons of impacts against invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in equivalent populations have not been performed. We compared the vaccines (prevaccination 2007-2009 vs postvaccination 2013-2016) in Sweden, where the 21 counties use either PCV10 or PCV13 (introduced 2009-2010). Methods: All IPD episodes (n = 16992) were recorded in Sweden during 2005-2016. Of 14 186 isolates from 2007-2016, 13 468 (94.9%) were characterized with serotyping and 12 235 (86.2%) with antibiotic susceptibility. Poisson models assessed changes in incidence over time. Results: Invasive pneumococcal disease incidences decreased between 2005 and 2016 in vaccinated children (by 68.5%), and in the whole population (by 13.5%), but not among the elderly (increased by 2%) due to a substantial increase in nonvaccine types (NVTs). In 2016, NVTs constituted 72% of IPD cases in the elderly. Serotype 6A declined in PCV10 and PCV13 counties, whereas serotype 19A increased in PCV10 counties. There was no effect against serotype 3. Cross-protection was found between 6B and 6A but not between 19F and 19A. Serotype 6C increased in PCV10 counties, but not in PCV13 counties, suggesting cross-protection with 6A, which is included in PCV13. In the elderly, the increase in NVTs, excluding 6C, was more pronounced in PCV13 counties. Conclusions: The overall impact of IPD incidences was not statistically different irrespective of vaccine used. The incidence of serotypes, where the effect of the vaccines differed, will influence the cost-effectiveness of which vaccine to use in immunization programs. The dominance of NVTs suggests a limited effect of current pediatric PCVs against IPD in the elderly.

Population-level impact and herd effects following human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programmes were first implemented in several countries worldwide in 2007. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the population-level consequences and herd effects after female HPV vaccination programmes, to verify whether or not the high efficacy reported in randomised controlled clinical trials are materialising in real-world situations. METHODS: We searched the Medline and Embase databases (between Jan 1, 2007 and Feb 28, 2014) and conference abstracts for time-trend studies that analysed changes, between the pre-vaccination and post-vaccination periods, in the incidence or prevalence of at least one HPV-related endpoint: HPV infection, anogenital warts, and high-grade cervical lesions. We used random-effects models to derive pooled relative risk (RR) estimates. We stratified all analyses by age and sex. We did subgroup analyses by comparing studies according to vaccine type, vaccination coverage, and years since implementation of the vaccination programme. We assessed heterogeneity across studies using I(2) and χ(2) statistics and we did trends analysis to examine the dose-response association between HPV vaccination coverage and each study effect measure. FINDINGS: We identified 20 eligible studies, which were all undertaken in nine high-income countries and represent more than 140 million person-years of follow-up. In countries with female vaccination coverage of at least 50%, HPV type 16 and 18 infections decreased significantly between the pre-vaccination and post-vaccination periods by 68% (RR 0·32, 95% CI 0·19-0·52) and anogenital warts decreased significantly by 61% (0·39, 0·22-0·71) in girls 13-19 years of age. Significant reductions were also recorded in HPV types 31, 33, and 45 in this age group of girls (RR 0·72, 95% CI 0·54-0·96), which suggests cross-protection. Additionally, significant reductions in anogenital warts were also reported in boys younger than 20 years of age (0·66 [95% CI 0·47-0·91]) and in women 20-39 years of age (0·68 [95% CI 0·51-0·89]), which suggests herd effects. In countries with female vaccination coverage lower than 50%, significant reductions in HPV types 16 and 18 infection (RR 0·50, 95% CI 0·34-0·74]) and in anogenital warts (0·86 [95% CI 0·79-0·94]) occurred in girls younger than 20 years of age, with no indication of cross-protection or herd effects. INTERPRETATION: Our results are promising for the long-term population-level effects of HPV vaccination programmes. However, continued monitoring is essential to identify any signals of potential waning efficacy or type-replacement. FUNDING: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Immunogenicity assessment of HPV16/18 vaccine using the glutathione S-transferase L1 multiplex serology assay.

The glutathione S-transferase (GST)-L1 multiplex serology assay has favorable properties for use in clinical trials and epidemiologic studies, including low cost, high throughput capacity, and low serum volume requirement. Therefore, we evaluated the GST-L1 assay as a measure of HPV16/18 vaccine immunogenicity. Our study population included 65 women selected from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial who received the bivalent HPV16/18 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine at the recommended 0/1/6-month schedule. We tested replicate serum samples from months 0/1/12 (i.e., after 0/1/3 doses) by GST-L1 and 3 other commonly used serology assays, VLP-ELISA, SEAP-NA, and cLIA. We calculated the percentage of women seropositive by GST-L1 by time point and HPV type (14 HPV types), and compared GST-L1 to other assays using Spearman rank correlation coefficients. After 1 vaccine dose, seropositivity by GST-L1 was 40% each for HPV16 and HPV18, increasing to 100% and 98%, respectively, after 3 doses. Seropositivity after 3 doses ranged from 32% to 69% for HPV types 31/33/45, for which partial vaccine efficacy is reported, though increases also occurred for types with no evidence for cross-protection (e.g., HPV77). GST-L1 correlated best after 3 doses with VLP-ELISA (HPV16 and HPV18 each ρ = 0.72) and SEAP-NA (HPV16 ρ = 0.65, HPV18 ρ = 0.71) (all P < 0.001); correlation was lower with cLIA. The GST-L1 is suitable for evaluating HPV16/18 vaccine immunogenicity after 3 vaccine doses, although in contrast to other assays it may classify some samples as HPV16/18 seronegative. The assay's utility is limited for lower antibody levels such as after receipt of 1 dose.

Health economic analysis of human papillomavirus vaccines in women of Chile: perspective of the health care payer using a Markov model.

BACKGROUND: In Chile, significant reductions in cervical cancer incidence and mortality have been observed due to implementation of a well-organized screening program. However, it has been suggested that the inclusion of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for young adolescent women may be the best prospect to further reduce the burden of cervical cancer. This cost-effectiveness study comparing two available HPV vaccines in Chile was performed to support decision making on the implementation of universal HPV vaccination. METHODS: The present analysis used an existing static Markov model to assess the effect of screening and vaccination. This analysis includes the epidemiology of low-risk HPV types allowing for the comparison between the two vaccines (HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine and the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine), latest cross-protection data on HPV vaccines, treatment costs for cervical cancer, vaccine costs and 6% discounting per the health economic guideline for Chile. RESULTS: Projected incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs) for the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine was 116 United States (US) dollars per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained or 147 US dollars per life-years (LY) saved, while the projected ICUR/ICER for the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine was 541 US dollars per QALY gained or 726 US dollars per LY saved. Introduction of any HPV vaccine to the present cervical cancer prevention program of Chile is estimated to be highly cost-effective (below 1X gross domestic product [GDP] per capita, 14278 US dollars). In Chile, the addition of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine to the existing screening program dominated the addition of HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis results show that the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine is expected to be dominant and cost-saving in 69.3% and 77.6% of the replicates respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that the addition of any HPV vaccine to the current cervical screening program of Chile will be advantageous. However, this cost-effectiveness model shows that the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine dominated the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. Beyond the context of Chile, the data from this modelling exercise may support healthcare policy and decision-making pertaining to introduction of HPV vaccination in similar resource settings in the region.

Assessment of herd immunity and cross-protection after a human papillomavirus vaccination programme in Australia: a repeat cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: After the introduction of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme in Australia in April, 2007, we measured the prevalence of vaccine-targeted and closely related HPV types with the aim of assessing direct protection, cross-protection, and herd immunity. METHODS: In this repeat cross-sectional study, we recruited women aged 18-24 years who attended Pap screening between October, 2005, and July, 2007, in three major metropolitan areas of Australia to form our prevaccine-implementation sample. For our postvaccine-implementation sample, we recruited women aged 18-24 years who attended Pap screening in the same three metropolitan areas from August, 2010, to November, 2012. We compared the crude prevalence of HPV genotypes in cervical specimens between the prevaccine and the postvaccine implementation groups, with vaccination status validated against the National HPV Vaccination Program Register. We estimated adjusted prevalence ratios using log linear regression. We estimated vaccine effectiveness both for vaccine-targeted HPV types (16, 18, 6, and 11) and non-vaccine but related HPV types (31, 33, and 45). FINDINGS: 202 women were recruited into the prevaccine-implementation group, and 1058 were recruited into the postvaccine-implementation group. Crude prevalence of vaccine-targeted HPV genotypes was significantly lower in the postvaccine-implementation sample than in the prevaccine-implementation sample (58 [29%] of 202 vs 69 [7%] of 1058; p<0·0001). Compared with the prevaccine-implementation sample, adjusted prevalence ratios for vaccine-targeted HPV genotypes were 0·07 (95% CI 0·04-0·14; p<0·0001) in fully vaccinated women and 0·65 (0·43-0·96; p=0·03) in unvaccinated women, which suggests herd immunity. No significant declines were noted for non-vaccine-targeted HPV genotypes. However, within the postvaccine-implementation sample, adjusted vaccine effectiveness against vaccine-targeted HPV types for fully vaccinated women compared with unvaccinated women was 86% (95% CI 71-93), and was 58% (26-76) against non-vaccine-targeted but related genotypes (HPV 31, 33, and 45). INTERPRETATION: 6 years after the initiation of the Australian HPV vaccination programme, we have detected a substantial fall in vaccine-targeted HPV genotypes in vaccinated women; a lower prevalence of vaccine-targeted types in unvaccinated women, suggesting herd immunity; and a possible indication of cross-protection against HPV types related to the vaccine-targeted types in vaccinated women. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Cancer Council Victoria.

Prophylactic papillomavirus vaccines.

Human papillomaviruses (HPV) are the causative agents of cervical cancer, the third most common cancer in women. The development of prophylactic HPV vaccines Gardasil® and Cervarix® targeting the major oncogenic HPV types is now the frontline of cervical cancer prevention. Both vaccines have been proven to be highly effective and safe although there are still open questions about their target population, cross-protection, and long-term efficacy. The main limitation for a worldwide implementation of Gardasil® and Cervarix® is their high cost. To develop more affordable vaccines research groups are concentrated in new formulations with different antigens including capsomeres, the minor capsid protein L2 and DNA. In this article we describe the vaccines' impact on HPV-associated disease, the main open questions about the marketed vaccines, and current efforts for the development of second-generation vaccines.

Incremental cost-effectiveness evaluation of vaccinating girls against cervical cancer pre- and post-sexual debut in Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) to prevent cervical cancer (CC) primarily targets young girls before sexual debut and is cost-effective. We assessed whether vaccination with the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine added to screening remains cost-effective in females after sexual debut compared to screening alone in Belgium. The role of protection against non-HPV-16/18 was also investigated. METHODS: A published Markov cohort model was adapted to Belgium. The model replicated the natural history of HPV infection, the effects of screening, and vaccination. Vaccine efficacy (VE) included non-HPV-16/18 protection based on the PATRICIA clinical trial data. Pre- and post-HPV exposure VE were differentiated. Lifetime vaccine protection was assumed. Input data were obtained from literature review, national databases and a Delphi panel. Costing was from a healthcare payer perspective. Costs were discounted at 3% and effects at 1.5%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and the number of lesions prevented with vaccination from age 12 to 40 was evaluated. The specific effect of non-HPV-16/18 protection was investigated. Univariate sensitivity analysis was performed on key variables. RESULTS: The model estimated that vaccinating a cohort of 100,000 girls at age 12 would prevent 646 CC cases over a lifetime (102 non-HPV-16/18) with an ICER of €9171/QALY. Vaccinating at age 26 would prevent 340 CC cases (40 non-HPV-16/18) with an ICER of €17,348/QALY and vaccinating at age 40 would prevent 146 CC cases (17 non-HPV-16/18) with an ICER of €42,847/QALY. The ICER remained under the highly cost-effective threshold (1×GDP/capita) until age 33 years and under the cost-effective threshold (3×GDP/capita) beyond age 40. CONCLUSION: Extending HPV vaccination to females post-sexual debut could lead to a substantial reduction in CC-related burden and would be cost-effective in Belgium.

HPV vaccine cross-protection: Highlights on additional clinical benefit.

Prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines are administered in vaccination programs, targeted at young adolescent girls before sexual exposure, and in catch-up programs for young women in some countries. All the data indicate that HPV-virus-like particles (VLPs) effectively prevent papillomavirus infections with a high level of antibodies and safety. Since non-vaccine HPV types are responsible for about 30% of cervical cancers, cross-protection would potentially enhance primary cervical cancer prevention efforts. High levels of specific neutralizing antibodies can be generated after immunization with HPV VLPs. Immunity to HPV is type-specific. However, if we consider the phylogenetic tree including the different HPV types, we realize that a certain degree of cross-protection is possible, due to the high homology of some viral types with vaccine ones. The assessment of cross-protective properties of HPV vaccines is an extremely important matter, which has also increased public health implications and could add further value to their preventive potential. The impact of cross-protection is mostly represented by a reduction of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia CIN2-3 more than what expected. In this article we review the mechanisms and the effectiveness of Bivalent (HPV-16/-18) and Quadrivalent (HPV-6/-11/-16/-18) HPV vaccine cross-protection, focusing on the critical aspects and the potential biases in clinical trials, in order to understand how cross-protection could impact on clinical outcomes and on the new perspectives in post-vaccine era.

Cost-effectiveness of the prophylactic HPV vaccine: an application to the Netherlands taking non-cervical cancers and cross-protection into account.

Despite an effective screening programme, 600-700 women are still diagnosed with cervical cancer in the Netherlands each year. In 2009 a prophylactic vaccine against HPV-type 16 and 18 was implemented in the national immunisation programme to decrease the incidence of cervical cancer. There is evidence that infections with several oncogenic HPV types other than the vaccine types 16 and 18 are also prevented by vaccination, also known as cross-protection. Besides cervical cancer, HPV can also cause cancers at other sites such as the oropharynx, vulva, vagina and the anus/anal area. In this study we estimated the maximum health and economic benefits of vaccinating 12-year old girls against infection with HPV, taking cross-protection and non-cervical cancers into account. In the base-case, we found an incremental cost ratio (ICER) of €5815 per quality adjusted life year (QALY). Robustness of this result was examined in sensitivity analysis. The ICER proved to be most sensitive to vaccine price, discounting rates, costs of cervical cancer and to variation in the disutility of cervical cancer.

Inclusion of the benefits of enhanced cross-protection against cervical cancer and prevention of genital warts in the cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus vaccination in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Infection with HPV 16 and 18, the major causative agents of cervical cancer, can be prevented through vaccination with a bivalent or quadrivalent vaccine. Both vaccines provide cross-protection against HPV-types not included in the vaccines. In particular, the bivalent vaccine provides additional protection against HPV 31, 33, and 45 and the quadrivalent vaccine against HPV31. The quadrivalent vaccine additionally protects against low-risk HPV type 6 and 11, responsible for most cases of genital warts. In this study, we made an analytical comparison of the two vaccines in terms of cost-effectiveness including the additional benefits of cross-protection and protection against genital warts in comparison with a screening-only strategy. METHODS: We used a Markov model, simulating the progression from HPV infection to cervical cancer or genital warts. The model was used to estimate the difference in future costs and health effects of both HPV-vaccines separately. RESULTS: In a cohort of 100,000 women, use of the bivalent or quadrivalent vaccine (both at 50% vaccination coverage) reduces the cervical cancer incidence by 221 and 207 cases, corresponding to ICERs of €17,600/QALY and €18,900/QALY, respectively. It was estimated that the quadrivalent vaccine additionally prevents 4390 cases of genital warts, reducing the ICER to €16,300/QALY. Assuming a comparable willingness to pay for cancer and genital warts prevention, the difference in ICERs could justify a slightly higher price (~7% per dose) in favor of the quadrivalent vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Clearly, HPV vaccination has been implemented for the prevention of cervical cancer. From this perspective, use of the bivalent HPV vaccine appears to be most effective and cost-effective. Including the benefits of prevention against genital warts, the ICER of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine was found to be slightly more favourable. However, current decision-making on the introduction of HPV is driven by the primary cervical cancer outcome. New vaccine tenders could consider the benefits of cross-protection and the benefits of genital warts, which requires more balanced decision-making.

Cost-effectiveness models of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines: variability and impact of modeling assumptions.

Currently, 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV); and ten-valent PCV vaccine are marketed. Neither vaccine obtained regulatory approval based on efficacy trials, but instead were approved based on a surrogate end point: immunogenicity data measuring effective antibody levels. Therefore, direct measures of efficacy were unavailable at the time economic analyses were conducted. The authors systematically reviewed cost-effectiveness studies of ten-valent PCV and 13-valent PCV from the literature to analyze the methodologies and compare the assumptions made about vaccine effectiveness. The following three inputs were found the most variant across analyses: efficacy against acute otitis media; inclusion of indirect effects; and cross protection. These assumptions are discussed with regard to the validity of supporting data and implications on decision-making.

Modeling the impact of the difference in cross-protection data between a human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine and a human papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 vaccine in Canada.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, two vaccines that have demonstrated high efficacy against infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) types -16 and -18 are available. The HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine provides protection against genital warts (GW) while the HPV-16/18 vaccine may provide better protection against other oncogenic HPV types. In this analysis, the estimated clinical and economic benefit of each of these vaccines was compared in the Canadian setting. METHODS: A Markov model of the natural history of HPV infection among women, cervical cancer (CC) and GW was used to estimate the impact of vaccinating a cohort of 100,000 12-year-old females on lifetime outcomes and healthcare system costs (no indirect benefit in males included). A budget impact model was used to estimate the impact of each vaccine by province. RESULTS: In the base case, vaccination with the HPV-16/18 vaccine was predicted to prevent 48 additional CC cases, and 16 additional CC deaths, while vaccination with the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine was predicted to prevent 6,933 additional GW cases. Vaccination with the HPV-16/18 vaccine was estimated to save 1 additional discounted quality adjusted life year (QALY) at an overall lower lifetime cost to the healthcare system compared to the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine (assuming vaccine price parity). In sensitivity analyses, the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine was associated with greater QALYs saved when the cross-protection efficacy of the HPV-16/18 vaccine was reduced, or the burden of GW due to HPV-6/11 was increased. In most scenarios with price parity, the lifetime healthcare cost of the strategy with the HPV-16/18 vaccine was predicted to be lower than the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. In the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the HPV-16/18 vaccine provided more QALY benefit than the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine in 49.2% of scenarios, with lower relative lifetime costs in 83.5% of scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the predicted lifetime healthcare costs and QALYs saved by implementing each of the vaccines are similar. Vaccination with the HPV-16/18 vaccine is expected to be associated with reduced CC disease morbidity and mortality compared to vaccination with the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. Differences in these outcomes depend on the extent of cervical disease prevented by cross-protection and the burden of GW caused by HPV-6/11.

Assessment of the cross-protective capability of recombinant capsid proteins derived from pig, rat, and avian hepatitis E viruses (HEV) against challenge with a genotype 3 HEV in pigs.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV), the causative agent of hepatitis E, is primarily transmitted via the fecal-oral route through contaminated water supplies, although many sporadic cases of hepatitis E are transmitted zoonotically via direct contact with infected animals or consumption of contaminated animal meats. Genotypes 3 and 4 HEV are zoonotic and infect humans and other animal species, whereas genotypes 1 and 2 HEV are restricted to humans. There exists a single serotype of HEV, although the cross-protective ability among the animal HEV strains is unknown. Thus, in this study we expressed and characterized N-terminal truncated ORF2 capsid antigens derived from swine, rat, and avian HEV strains and evaluated their cross-protective ability in a pig challenge model. Thirty, specific-pathogen-free, pigs were divided into 5 groups of 6 pigs each, and each group of pigs were vaccinated with 200 µg of swine HEV, rat HEV, or avian HEV ORF2 antigen or PBS buffer (2 groups) as positive and negative control groups. After a booster dose immunization at 2 weeks post-vaccination, the vaccinated animals all seroconverted to IgG anti-HEV. At 4 weeks post-vaccination, the animals were intravenously challenged with a genotype 3 mammalian HEV, and necropsied at 4 weeks post-challenge. Viremia, fecal virus shedding, and liver histological lesions were compared to assess the protective and cross-protective abilities of these antigens against HEV challenge in pigs. The results indicated that pigs vaccinated with truncated recombinant capsid antigens derived from three animal strains of HEV induced a strong IgG anti-HEV response in vaccinated pigs, but these antigens confer only partial cross-protection against a genotype 3 mammalian HEV. The results have important implications for the efficacy of current vaccines and for future vaccine development, especially against the novel zoonotic animal strains of HEV.

Impact of vaccine protection against multiple HPV types on the cost-effectiveness of cervical screening.

Cross-protection against non-HPV16/18 types and the emergence of broad spectrum vaccines protecting against multiple HPV types will influence the cost-effectiveness of future screening. To assess this influence we used an individual-based simulation model describing the relation between 14 HPV types and cervical disease, allowing the occurrence of multiple type infections. Screening scenarios for vaccinated women were evaluated, firstly for HPV16/18 vaccination with partial cross-protection against HPV 31, 33, 45 and 58 and secondly, for broad spectrum vaccination against 5-13 HPV types. The vaccine-induced incidence reduction of type-specific infection was varied from 0 to 95% in the cross-protection setting and set at 100% in the setting of broad spectrum vaccines. Scenarios of either cytology or HPV DNA screening were considered under varying lifetime number of screening rounds. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000/QALY, four times HPV DNA screening between 30 and 60 years was the selected scenario in addition to HPV16/18 vaccination, whether or not cross-protection was conferred (€6707 and €9994/QALY, respectively). In the absence of cross-protection, a fifth screening round might be considered (ICER €22,967/QALY). In addition to broad spectrum vaccination, one screen during lifetime was cost-effective up to an 11-valent vaccine. If the vaccine-induced type-specific incidence reduction was lowered to 99%, one screen during lifetime was cost-effective even in addition to 13-valent vaccination. In conclusion, in a cohort of HPV16/18 vaccinated women, four rounds of HPV DNA screening is cost-effective. One screen during lifetime remains cost-effective in addition to broad spectrum vaccination offering protection against many high-risk HPV types.

Comparative assessment of a DNA and protein Leishmania donovani gamma glutamyl cysteine synthetase vaccine to cross-protect against murine cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by L. major or L. mexicana infection.

Leishmaniasis is a major health problem and it is estimated that 12 million people are currently infected. A vaccine which could cross-protect people against different Leishmania spp. would facilitate control of this disease as more than one species of Leishmania may be present. In this study the ability of a DNA vaccine, using the full gene sequence for L. donovani gamma glutamyl cysteine synthetase (γGCS) incorporated in the pVAX vector (pVAXγGCS), and a protein vaccine, using the corresponding recombinant L. donovani γGCS protein (LdγGCS), to protect against L. major or L. mexicana infection was evaluated. DNA vaccination gave transient protection against L. major and no protection against L. mexicana despite significantly enhancing specific antibody titres in vaccinated infected mice compared to infected controls. Vaccination with the LdγGCS protected against both species but only if the protein was incorporated into non-ionic surfactant vesicles for L. mexicana. The results of this study indicate that a L. donovani γGCS vaccine could be used to vaccinate against more than one Leishmania species but only if the recombinant protein is used.