4.6 Review

Current status of therapeutic HPV vaccines

Journal

GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
Volume 156, Issue 2, Pages 503-510

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.12.017

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [R01 CA142691, P50 CA098252, P30 CA6973]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The accumulating successes of immune-based treatments for solid tumors have prompted an explosion of cancer clinical trials testing strategies to elicit tumor-specific immune effector responses, either alone, in combination with immune checkpoint blockade, or with conventional cancer treatment modalities. However, across the board, clinical responses have been achieved in only a limited subset of cancer patients, underscoring a critical need to identify mechanisms and biomarkers of response, as well as mechanisms of resistance to therapy. Cancers caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) are driven by two viral oncoproteins, E6 and E7, both of which are functionally required for cellular transformation, thereby providing non-'self, tumor-specific antigenic targets. Immune responses that are specific for either or both of these oncoproteins can be used to follow the magnitude and kinetics of immune responses to therapeutic interventions. Moreover, identifying neoantigens is not a concern in early-stage disease - since HPV cancers are driven by HPV oncoproteins, the somatic mutational load in early disease is low, particularly in comparison to non-HPV-related squamous cancers arising in the same organ site [1,2]. Cancers caused by HPV are a model clinical setting in which to test principles of immunotherapies, and to discover mechanisms of interactions between tumors and their attendant immune milieu. In this review, we will use examples of insights gained from studies of HPV disease to illustrate major themes of immune-based therapeutic strategies. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available