Doravirine/Lamivudine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate is Non-inferior to Efavirenz/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in Treatment-naive Adults With Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 Infection: Week 48 Results of the DRIVE-AHEAD Trial.

Background: Doravirine (DOR), a novel non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), is active against wild-type Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-1 and the most common NNRTI-resistant variants, and has a favorable and unique in vitro resistance profile. Methods: DRIVE-AHEAD is a phase 3, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Antiretroviral treatment-naive adults with ≥1000 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL were randomized (1:1) to once-daily, fixed-dose DOR at 100 mg, lamivudine at 300 mg, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) at 300 mg (DOR/3TC/TDF) or to efavirenz at 600 mg, emtricitabine at 200 mg, and TDF at 300 mg (EFV/FTC/TDF) for 96 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with <50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL at week 48 (Food and Drug Administration snapshot approach; non-inferiority margin 10%). Results: Of the 734 participants randomized, 728 were treated (364 per group) and included in the analyses. At week 48, 84.3% (307/364) of DOR/3TC/TDF recipients and 80.8% (294/364) of EFV/FTC/TDF recipients achieved <50 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL (difference 3.5%, 95% CI, -2.0, 9.0). DOR/3TC/TDF recipients had significantly lower rates of dizziness (8.8% vs 37.1%), sleep disorders/disturbances (12.1% vs 25.2%), and altered sensorium (4.4% vs 8.2%) than EFV/FTC/TDF recipients. Mean changes in fasting low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) were significantly different between DOR/3TC/TDF and EFV/FTC/TDF (-1.6 vs +8.7 mg/dL and -3.8 vs +13.3 mg/dL, respectively). Conclusions: In HIV-1 treatment-naive adults, DOR/3TC/TDF demonstrated non-inferior efficacy to EFV/FTC/TDF at week 48 and was well tolerated, with significantly fewer neuropsychiatric events and minimal changes in LDL-C and non-HDL-C compared with EFV/FTC/TDF. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02403674.

Effectiveness of Elbasvir and Grazoprevir Combination, With or Without Ribavirin, for Treatment-Experienced Patients With Chronic Hepatitis C Infection.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1, 4, or 6, with or without cirrhosis, previously treated with peg-interferon and ribavirin, are a challenge to treat. We performed a phase 3 randomized controlled open-label trial to assess the effects of 12 or 16 weeks of treatment with once-daily elbasvir (an HCV NS5A inhibitor, 50 mg) and grazoprevir (an HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor, 100 mg), in a fixed-dose combination tablet, with or without twice-daily ribavirin, in this patient population. METHODS: We analyzed data from 420 patients (35% with cirrhosis, 64% with a null or partial response to peg-interferon and ribavirin) who were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to groups given elbasvir and grazoprevir once daily, with or without twice-daily ribavirin, for 12 or 16 weeks, at 65 study centers in 15 countries in Europe, Asia, and Central and North America. Randomization was stratified by cirrhosis status and type of peg-interferon and ribavirin treatment failure. HCV RNA was measured using COBAS TaqMan v2.0. The primary end point was HCV RNA <15 IU/mL, 12 weeks after completion of treatment (SVR12). We aimed to determine whether the proportion of patients achieving an SVR12 in any group was greater than the reference rate (58%). RESULTS: With 12 weeks of treatment, an SVR12 was achieved by 92.4% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir and 94.2% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir with ribavirin. With 16 weeks of treatment, an SVR12 was achieved by 92.4% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir and 98.1% of patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir with ribavirin. Among patients treated for 12 weeks without ribavirin, virologic failure occurred in 6.8%, 0%, and 12.5% of patients with HCV genotype 1a, 1b, or 4 infection, respectively. Among patients given elbasvir and grazoprevir for 12 weeks, virologic failure occurred in 0% of patients infected with HCV genotypes 1 and 4 who relapsed after completing peg-interferon and ribavirin, and 7.5% infected with HCV genotypes 1 and 4, respectively, with a null or partial response to peg-interferon and ribavirin. Among patients treated for 16 weeks who received ribavirin, there were no incidences of virologic failure. Common adverse events were fatigue (23.1%), headache (19.8%), and nausea (11.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination tablet of elbasvir and grazoprevir, with or without ribavirin, was highly efficacious in inducing an SVR12 in patients with HCV genotype 1, 4, or 6 infection failed by previous treatment with peg-interferon and ribavirin, including patients with cirrhosis and/or a prior null response. The treatment was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT02105701.

Doravirine versus ritonavir-boosted darunavir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 (DRIVE-FORWARD): 96-week results of a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Doravirine is a novel, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor that has shown non-inferior efficacy to ritonavir-boosted darunavir, with a superior lipid profile, in adults with HIV who were treatment naive at week 48 in the phase 3 DRIVE-FORWARD trial. Here we present the 96-week data for the study. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, double-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 study was undertaken at 125 clinical centres in 15 countries. Eligible participants were adults (aged ≥18 years) infected with HIV-1 who were naive to antiretroviral therapy, with a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of 1000 copies per mL or higher at screening, and no known resistance to any of the study drugs. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by baseline HIV-1 RNA concentration and background nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor therapy, to doravirine (100 mg per day) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (100 mg ritonavir and 800 mg darunavir per day), both with investigator-selected nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors: emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or abacavir and lamivudine. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment assignment until week 96. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants who had a plasma HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48, which has been reported previously. Here we report the key secondary efficacy endpoint of the proportion of participants who achieved this concentration by week 96, assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of any study drug, regardless of whether it was their randomly assigned treatment. We used a US Food and Drug Administration snapshot approach and a margin of 10 percentage points to define the non-inferiority of doravirine to ritonavir-boosted darunavir at 96 weeks. Key safety endpoints were change in fasting serum lipid concentrations, the incidence of adverse events, and time to discontinuation due to an adverse event, assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of any study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02275780, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2014, and Oct 20, 2015, 1027 individuals were screened, of whom 769 participants were randomly assigned to doravirine (n=385) or ritonavir-boosted darunavir (n=384), and 383 in both groups were given at least one dose of their allocated treatment. Most participants were male (645 [84%] of 766) and white (560 [73%]), with a mean age of 35·2 years (SD 10·6). 292 participants in the doravirine group and 273 in the darunavir group completed 96 weeks of treatment. At week 96, a higher proportion of the doravirine group (277 [73%] of 383) achieved an HIV-1 RNA concentration of less than 50 copies per mL than did of the darunavir group (248 [66%] of 383; difference 7·1%, 95% CI 0·5-13·7). Responses were similar regardless of baseline characteristics. Treatment-emergent resistance to any study drug occurred in two (1%) of 383 participants in the doravirine group and one (<1%) of 383 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir group. Significant differences were seen between treatment groups in mean changes from baseline in LDL cholesterol (-14·6 mg/dL, 95% CI -18·2 to -11·0) and non-HDL cholesterol (-18·4 mg/dL, -22·5 to -14·3). Frequencies of adverse events were similar between groups. No significant treatment difference (log-rank nominal p=0·063) through week 96 was observed in time to discontinuation due to an adverse event. The most common adverse events (week 0-96) were diarrhoea (65 [17%] in the doravirine group vs 91 [24%] in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir group), nausea (45 [12%] vs 52 [14%]), headache (57 [15%] vs 46 [12%]), and upper respiratory tract infection (51 [13%] vs 30 [8%]). Two participants, one in each group, died during treatment; neither death was considered to be related to study medication. INTERPRETATION: These results through 96 weeks support the efficacy and safety results reported previously for doravirine at 48 weeks, supporting the use of doravirine for the long-term treatment of adults with previously untreated HIV-1 infection. FUNDING: Merck.

Impact of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine in a sexually active population of North American women.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to inform policy regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in North America. We measured the clinical impact of HPV-6/-11/-16/-18 vaccination in North American women. STUDY DESIGN: The study enrolled 21,954 women, the majority aged 16-25, across 5 studies of a quadrivalent HPV vaccine or its HPV-16 vaccine prototype. The North American subjects (n = 5996) were pooled from these trials, and the prevalence of HPV-6/-11/-16/-18 exposure was measured. The impact of vaccination on the burden of anogenital HPV lesions in an intention-to-treat population (regardless of enrollment HPV status) was calculated. RESULTS: At enrollment, the median age was 20 years; 13% of the women had had a Papanicolaou test abnormality, and 76% of the women had negative tests results for all 4 vaccine HPV types. With approximately 3 years of follow-up evaluations in the intention-to-treat population (regardless of enrollment HPV status), vaccination reduced the rate of HPV-16- and -18-related precancers and HPV-6/-11/-16/-18-related genital lesions by 66.4% (95% CI, 42.7%-81.1%) and 57.7% (95% CI, 27.3%-76.3%), respectively. CONCLUSION: The administration of HPV vaccine to sexually active North American women reduced the burden of HPV-6/-11/-16/-18-related disease. Catch-up vaccination programs in this population are warranted.

Doravirine versus ritonavir-boosted darunavir in antiretroviral-naive adults with HIV-1 (DRIVE-FORWARD): 48-week results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Doravirine is a novel non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) with a pharmacokinetic profile supporting once-daily dosing, and potent in-vitro activity against the most common NNRTI-resistant HIV-1 variants. We compared doravirine with ritonavir-boosted darunavir, when both were given with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), in adults with previously untreated HIV-1 infection. METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, double-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority trial, adults with HIV-1 infection were screened and enrolled at 125 clinical centres in 15 countries. Eligible participants (aged ≥18 years) were naive to antiretroviral therapy with plasma HIV-1 RNA of at least 1000 copies per mL at screening. Participants who had previously been treated for a viral infection other than HIV-1, those taking immunosuppressive drugs, and individuals with active acute hepatitis were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice and web response system to receive oral doravirine 100 mg or darunavir 800 mg plus ritonavir 100 mg once daily, with two investigator-selected NRTIs (tenofovir and emtricitabine or abacavir and lamivudine) for up to 96 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by HIV-1 RNA measurements at screening (≤100 000 vs >100 000 copies per mL) and the NRTI pair. Study participants, funding institution staff, investigators, and study site personnel were masked to treatment group assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at week 48 defined by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with non-inferiority established if the lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference (doravirine minus darunavir) was greater than -10 percentage points. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the primary efficacy and safety analyses. This trial is active, but not recruiting, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02275780. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2014, and Oct 20, 2015, 1027 participants were screened for eligibility, of whom 769 participants were randomly assigned to treatment (385 with doravirine and 384 with ritonavir-boosted darunavir). 56 participants discontinued treatment in the doravirine group compared with 71 in the darunavir group, mostly due to loss to follow-up. 383 participants who received doravirine and 383 who received darunavir were included in the primary efficacy analyses. At week 48, 321 (84%) participants in the doravirine group and 306 (80%) in the darunavir group achieved plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 50 copies per mL (difference 3·9%, 95% CI -1·6 to 9·4), indicating non-inferiority of the doravirine regimen. The most common study drug-related adverse events were diarrhoea (21 [5%] of 383 participants in the doravirine group and 49 [13%] of 383 participants in the darunavir group), nausea (25 [7%] vs 29 [8%]), and headache (23 [6%] vs ten [3%]). 18 participants (six [2%] of 383 participants in the doravirine group vs 12 [3%] of 383 participants in the darunavir group) discontinued treatment due to adverse events, which were considered drug-related in four (1%) participants in the doravirine group and 8 (2%) participants in the darunavir group. Serious adverse events occurred in 19 (5%) of 383 participants in the doravirine group and 23 (6%) of 383 in the darunavir roup, and were considered study-drug related in one (<1%) participant of each group. INTERPRETATION: In treatment-naive adults with HIV-1 infection, doravirine combined with two NRTIs might offer a valuable treatment option for adults with previously untreated HIV-1 infection. FUNDING: Merck & Co.

Ten year follow-up of healthy children who received one or two injections of varicella vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The rate of varicella and persistence of varicella antibody after a one dose vs. a two dose regimen of varicella virus vaccine live Oka/Merck (VARIVAX; Merck & Co., Inc., West Point, PA) in approximately 2000 children were compared during a 9- to 10-year follow-up period. METHODS: Children 12 months to 12 years of age with a negative history of varicella were randomized in late 1991 to early 1993 to receive either one or two injections of varicella vaccine given 3 months apart. Subjects were actively followed for varicella, any varicella-like illness or zoster and any exposures to varicella or zoster on a yearly basis for 10 years after vaccination. Persistence of varicella antibody was measured yearly for 9 years. RESULTS: Most cases of varicella reported in recipients of one or two injections of vaccine were mild. The risk of developing varicella >42 days postvaccination during the 10-year observation period was 3.3-fold lower (P < 0.001) in children who received two injections than in those who received one injection (2.2% vs. 7.3%, respectively). The estimated vaccine efficacy for the 10-year observation period was 94.4% for one injection and 98.3% for two injections (P < 0.001). Measurable serum antibody persisted for 9 years in all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of either one or two injections of varicella vaccine to healthy children results in long term protection against most varicella disease. The two dose regimen was significantly more effective than a single injection.

Interrogating two schedules of the AKT inhibitor MK-2206 in patients with advanced solid tumors incorporating novel pharmacodynamic and functional imaging biomarkers.

PURPOSE: Multiple cancers harbor genetic aberrations that impact AKT signaling. MK-2206 is a potent pan-AKT inhibitor with a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) previously established at 60 mg on alternate days (QOD). Due to a long half-life (60-80 hours), a weekly (QW) MK-2206 schedule was pursued to compare intermittent QW and continuous QOD dosing. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced cancers were enrolled in a QW dose-escalation phase I study to investigate the safety and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic profiles of tumor and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). The QOD MTD of MK-2206 was also assessed in patients with ovarian and castration-resistant prostate cancers and patients with advanced cancers undergoing multiparametric functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, including dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and intrinsic susceptibility-weighted MRI. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients were enrolled; 38 patients had 60 mg MK-2206 QOD, whereas 33 received MK-2206 at 90, 135, 150, 200, 250, and 300 mg QW. The QW MK-2206 MTD was established at 200 mg following dose-limiting rash at 250 and 300 mg. QW dosing appeared to be similarly tolerated to QOD, with toxicities including rash, gastrointestinal symptoms, fatigue, and hyperglycemia. Significant AKT pathway blockade was observed with both continuous QOD and intermittent QW dosing of MK-2206 in serially obtained tumor and PRP specimens. The functional imaging studies demonstrated that complex multiparametric MRI protocols may be effectively implemented in a phase I trial. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with MK-2206 safely results in significant AKT pathway blockade in QOD and QW schedules. The intermittent dose of 200 mg QW is currently used in phase II MK-2206 monotherapy and combination studies (NCT00670488).

Phase I trial of vorinostat combined with bortezomib for the treatment of relapsing and/or refractory multiple myeloma.

UNLABELLED: Preclinical studies have shown that targeted combination therapy consisting of vorinostat and bortezomib has antitumor activity in multiple myeloma (MM). We examined this drug combination in advanced relapsing and/or refractory MM patients (n = 34). Although the maximum tolerated dose was not reached, the study found this combination regimen generally well tolerated and clinically active in relapsed and/or refractory MM patients. BACKGROUND: Development of targeted therapies for MM has improved response rates and increased patient survival, but ultimately the disease becomes refractory and progresses. Vorinostat combined with bortezomib has demonstrated synergistic antiproliferative and proapoptotic activity in preclinical models of MM. The objectives of this study were to determine the maximum tolerated dose for vorinostat with bortezomib in patients with advanced MM and to evaluate the clinical benefit of this new drug combination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients ≥ 18 years old with relapsed and/or refractory MM were enrolled into escalating dose cohorts of vorinostat and bortezomib combination therapy. Thirty-four patients were enrolled and were evaluable for safety and efficacy analyses. RESULTS: All patients reported adverse events, 89% of which were mild to moderate in severity. Thirteen patients experienced 29 serious adverse events, 12 (41%) of which were considered drug-related. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Partial responses were observed in 9 (27%) patients. Minimal responses were observed in 2 additional patients (6%), and another 20 patients (59%) experienced disease stabilization. CONCLUSION: Vorinostat with bortezomib is generally well-tolerated and has clinical activity in patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM. Response rates were similar in patients previously exposed to bortezomib and patients who were naive to bortezomib therapy.

First-in-man clinical trial of the oral pan-AKT inhibitor MK-2206 in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: AKT signaling is frequently deregulated in human cancers. MK-2206 is a potent, oral allosteric inhibitor of all AKT isoforms with antitumor activity in preclinical models. A phase I study of MK-2206 was conducted to investigate its safety, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics (PKs), pharmacodynamics (PDs), and preliminary antitumor efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors received MK-2206 on alternate days. Paired tumor biopsies were mandated at the MTD for biomarker studies. PD studies incorporated tumor and hair follicle analyses, and putative predictive biomarker studies included tumor somatic mutation analyses and immunohistochemistry for phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) loss. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients received MK-2206 at 30, 60, 75, or 90 mg on alternate days. Dose-limiting toxicities included skin rash and stomatitis, establishing the MTD at 60 mg. Drug-related toxicities included skin rash (51.5%), nausea (36.4%), pruritus (24.2%), hyperglycemia (21.2%), and diarrhea (21.2%). PKs (area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 48 hours and maximum measured plasma concentration) were dose proportional. Phosphorylated serine 473 AKT declined in all tumor biopsies assessed (P = .015), and phosphorylated threonine 246 proline-rich AKT substrate 40 was suppressed in hair follicles at 6 hours (P = .008), on days 7 (P = .028) and 15 (P = .025) with MK-2206; reversible hyperglycemia and increases in insulin c-peptide were also observed, confirming target modulation. A patient with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PTEN loss; KRAS G12D mutation) treated at 60 mg on alternate days experienced a decrease of approximately 60% in cancer antigen 19-9 levels and 23% shrinkage in tumor measurements. Two patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors had minor tumor responses. CONCLUSION: MK-2206 was well tolerated, with evidence of AKT signaling blockade. Rational combination trials are ongoing to maximize clinical benefit with this therapeutic strategy.

Impact of human papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 vaccine on all HPV-associated genital diseases in young women.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the prophylactic vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6, 11, 16, and 18 (HPV6/11/16/18) on all HPV-associated genital disease was investigated in a population that approximates sexually naive women in that they were "negative to 14 HPV types" and in a mixed population of HPV-exposed and -unexposed women (intention-to-treat group). METHODS: This analysis studied 17 622 women aged 15-26 years who were enrolled in one of two randomized, placebo-controlled, efficacy trials for the HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine (first patient on December 28, 2001, and studies completed July 31, 2007). Vaccine or placebo was given at day 1, month 2, and month 6. All women underwent cervicovaginal sampling and Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at day 1 and every 6-12 months thereafter. Outcomes were any cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; any external anogenital and vaginal lesions; Pap test abnormalities; and procedures such as colposcopy and definitive therapy. Absolute rates are expressed as women with endpoint per 100 person-years at risk. RESULTS: The average follow-up was 3.6 years (maximum of 4.9 years). In the population that was negative to 14 HPV types, vaccination was up to 100% effective in reducing the risk of HPV16/18-related high-grade cervical, vulvar, and vaginal lesions and of HPV6/11-related genital warts. In the intention-to-treat group, vaccination also statistically significantly reduced the risk of any high-grade cervical lesions (19.0% reduction; rate vaccine = 1.43, rate placebo = 1.76, difference = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.13 to 0.54), vulvar and vaginal lesions (50.7% reduction; rate vaccine = 0.10, rate placebo = 0.20, difference = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.16), genital warts (62.0% reduction; rate vaccine = 0.44, rate placebo = 1.17, difference = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.58 to 0.87), Pap abnormalities (11.3% reduction; rate vaccine = 10.36, rate placebo = 11.68, difference = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.90), and cervical definitive therapy (23.0% reduction; rate vaccine = 1.97, rate placebo = 2.56, difference = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.83), irrespective of causal HPV type. CONCLUSIONS: High-coverage HPV vaccination programs among adolescents and young women may result in a rapid reduction of genital warts, cervical cytological abnormalities, and diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. In the longer term, substantial reductions in the rates of cervical, vulvar, and vaginal cancers may follow.

The impact of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV; types 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine on infection and disease due to oncogenic nonvaccine HPV types in sexually active women aged 16-26 years.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the impact of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine on infection and cervical disease related to 10 nonvaccine HPV types (31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, and 59) associated with >20% of cervical cancers. The population evaluated included HPV-naive women and women with preexisting HPV infection and/or HPV-related disease at enrollment. METHODS: Phase 3 efficacy studies enrolled 17,622 women aged 16-26 years. Subjects underwent cervicovaginal sampling and Pap testing on day 1 and then at 6-12-month intervals for up to 4 years. HPV typing was performed on samples from enrollment and follow-up visits, including samples obtained for diagnosis or treatment of HPV-related disease. All subjects who received 1 dose and returned for follow-up were included. RESULTS: Vaccination reduced the rate of HPV-31/33/45/52/58 infection by 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1% to 28.7%) and of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1-3 or adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) by 18.8% (95% CI, 7.4% to 28.9%). Vaccination also reduced the rate of HPV-31/58/59-related CIN1-3/AIS by 26.0% (95% CI, 6.7% to 41.4%), 28.1% (95% CI, 5.3% to 45.6%), and 37.6% (95% CI, 6.0% to 59.1%), respectively. Although a modest reduction in HPV-31/33/45/52/58-related CIN2 or worse was observed, the estimated reduction was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These cross-protection results complement the vaccine's prophylactic efficacy against disease associated with HPV-6, -11, -16, and -18. Long-term monitoring of vaccinated populations are needed to fully ascertain the population-based impact and public health significance of these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00092521 , NCT00092534 , and NCT00092482.

The impact of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV; types 6, 11, 16, and 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.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 vaccine reduces the risk of HPV-6/11/16/18-related cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1-3 or adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS). Here, its impact on CIN1-3/AIS associated with nonvaccine oncogenic HPV types was evaluated. METHODS: We enrolled 17,622 women aged 16-26 years. All underwent cervicovaginal sampling and Pap testing at regular intervals for up to 4 years. HPV genotyping was performed for biopsy samples, and histological diagnoses were determined by a pathology panel. Analyses were conducted among subjects who were negative for 14 HPV types on day 1. Prespecified analyses included infection of 6 months' duration and CIN1-3/AIS due to the 2 and 5 most common HPV types in cervical cancer after HPV types 16 and 18, as well as all tested nonvaccine types. RESULTS: Vaccination reduced the incidence of HPV-31/45 infection by 40.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.9% to 59.0%) and of CIN1-3/AIS by 43.6% (95% CI, 12.9% to 64.1%), respectively. The reduction in HPV-31/33/45/52/58 infection and CIN1-3/AIS was 25.0% (95% CI, 5.0% to 40.9%) and 29.2% (95% CI, 8.3% to 45.5%), respectively. Efficacy for CIN2-3/AIS associated with the 10 nonvaccine HPV types was 32.5% (95% CI, 6.0% to 51.9%). Reductions were most notable for HPV-31. CONCLUSIONS: HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine reduced the risk of CIN2-3/AIS associated with nonvaccine types responsible for approximately 20% of cervical cancers. The clinical benefit of cross-protection is not expected to be fully additive to the efficacy already observed against HPV-6/11/16/18-related disease, because women may have >1 CIN lesion, each associated with a different HPV type. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00092521 , NCT00092534 , and NCT00092482.

HPV antibody levels and clinical efficacy following administration of a prophylactic quadrivalent HPV vaccine.

The efficacy of the quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is thought to be mediated by humoral immunity. We evaluated the correlation between quadrivalent HPV vaccine-induced serum anti-HPV responses and efficacy. 17,622 women were vaccinated at day 1, and months 2 and 6. At day 1 and at 6-12 months intervals for up to 48 months, subjects underwent Papanicolaou and genital HPV testing. No immune correlate of protection could be found due to low number of cases. Although 40% of vaccine subjects were anti-HPV 18 seronegative at end-of-study, efficacy against HPV 18-related disease remained high (98.4%; 95% CI: 90.5-100.0) despite high attack rates in the placebo group. These results suggest vaccine-induced protection via immune memory, or lower than detectable HPV 18 antibody titers.

Induction of immune memory following administration of a prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6/11/16/18 L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The duration of protection afforded by vaccines represents a critical test of their utility as public health interventions. Some vaccines induce long-term immunity, while others require booster doses. Vaccines that induce long-term protection are usually characterized by the generation of immune memory. Recent trials of a quadrivalent (types 6, 11, 16, 18) human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine have demonstrated high efficacy through 5 years of follow-up. We evaluated the extent to which the vaccine is able to generate HPV type-specific immune memory. METHODS: A total of 552, 16-23-year-old women were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. At enrollment, subjects were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive three-dose regimens of quadrivalent HPV vaccine or placebo with 3 years' follow-up. A subset of 241 subjects (n=114 in the quadrivalent HPV vaccine group and n=127 in the placebo group) underwent 2 further years of follow-up. All extension subjects received quadrivalent HPV vaccine at month 60 to examine the extent of immune memory in response to the primary vaccination series. RESULTS: Serum anti-HPV levels declined post-vaccination, but reached a plateau at month 24 that remained stable through month 60. Administration of a challenge dose of vaccine induced a classic anamnestic response, with anti-HPV levels 1 week post-challenge reaching levels observed 1 month following the completion of the three-dose primary series. At 1 month post-challenge, anti-HPV responses were higher than those observed 1-month post-dose 3. DISCUSSION: A three-dose regimen of quadrivalent HPV vaccine induces high efficacy and stable anti-HPV levels for at least 5 years. Vaccination also induces robust immune memory. These findings suggest that the efficacy of this vaccine will be long lasting.

Immunologic responses following administration of a vaccine targeting human papillomavirus Types 6, 11, 16, and 18.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection causes cervical cancer and genital warts. Young women (1106) were randomized to receive one of three formulations of a quadrivalent HPV (Types 6/11/16/18) L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine or one of two placebo formulations. The goal was to assess vaccine safety and immunogenicity in baseline HPV 6/11/16 or 18-naïve and previously infected subjects. All three formulations were highly immunogenic. At Month 2 (postdose 1), among women with vaccine-type antibodies at baseline, vaccine-induced anti-HPV responses were approximately 12- to 26-fold higher than those observed in baseline-naïve women, suggesting an anamnestic response. Following an initial, similar sized decline, anti-HPV responses plateaued and remained stable through end-of-study (3.0 years). No vaccine-related serious adverse experiences were reported.

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.

BACKGROUND: A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled phase II study was done to assess the efficacy of a prophylactic quadrivalent vaccine targeting the human papillomavirus (HPV) types associated with 70% of cervical cancers (types 16 and 18) and with 90% of genital warts (types 6 and 11). METHODS: 277 young women (mean age 20.2 years [SD 1.7]) were randomly assigned to quadrivalent HPV (20 microg type 6, 40 microg type 11, 40 microg type 16, and 20 microg type 18) L1 virus-like-particle (VLP) vaccine and 275 (mean age 20.0 years [1.7]) to one of two placebo preparations at day 1, month 2, and month 6. For 36 months, participants underwent regular gynaecological examinations, cervicovaginal sampling for HPV DNA, testing for serum antibodies to HPV, and Pap testing. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of infection with HPV 6, 11, 16, or 18, or cervical or external genital disease (ie, persistent HPV infection, HPV detection at the last recorded visit, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, cervical cancer, or external genital lesions caused by the HPV types in the vaccine). Main analyses were done per protocol. FINDINGS: Combined incidence of persistent infection or disease with HPV 6, 11, 16, or 18 fell by 90% (95% CI 71-97, p<0.0001) in those assigned vaccine compared with those assigned placebo. INTERPRETATION: A vaccine targeting HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18 could substantially reduce the acquisition of infection and clinical disease caused by common HPV types.

Early assessment of the efficacy of a human papillomavirus type 16 L1 virus-like particle vaccine.

A post hoc analysis was performed using combined data from two Phase I tolerability/immunogenicity studies of monovalent human papillomavirus type 11 (HPV11) or HPV16 L1 virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines. The goal was to determine if the HPV16 L1 VLP vaccine protected against HPV16 infection. Vaccine or placebo was given at 0, 2 and 6 months. HPV16 infection was defined by positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results following vaccination. The incidence of HPV infection was observed to be 0 cases per 100 person-years at risk in the vaccine group, and 5 cases per 100 person-years at risk in the control group. These results support the institution of larger efficacy trials for HPV L1 VLP vaccines.