4.7 Article

Head-to-Head Comparison of Bi- and Nonavalent Human Papillomavirus Vaccine-Induced Antibody Responses

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 226, Issue 7, Pages 1195-1199

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiac190

Keywords

human papillomavirus; vaccine; nonavalent; bivalent; international units; antibody

Funding

  1. Stockholm City Council
  2. Swedish Cancer Society [20 1198 PjF 01]
  3. European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program, RISCC [847845]
  4. European Union [603019]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study compared antibody levels against human papillomavirus after different vaccinations. The findings showed that bivalent vaccination resulted in higher levels of antibodies against HPV16/18, while nonavalent vaccination resulted in higher levels of antibodies against HPV6/11/31/33/45/52/58.
Comparison of antibody levels against human papillomavirus after vaccination found highest antibody levels against HPV16/18 after bivalent vaccination and against HPV6/11/31/33/45/52/58 after nonavalent vaccination. Antibodies against nonvaccine types were also found (HPV31/33/35/45 or 58 after bivalent; HPV35 after nonavalent vaccine). For head-to-head comparison of human papillomavirus (HPV) antibody levels induced by different vaccines, 25-year-old vaccine-naive women were given either the bivalent (n = 188) or the nonavalent HPV vaccine (n = 184). Six months after vaccination antibodies against pseudovirions from 17 different HPV types (HPV6/11/16/18/31/33/35/39/45/51/52/56/58/59/66/68/73) were measured. Antibodies against HPV16/18 were higher after bivalent HPV vaccination (mean international units [IU] 1140.1 and 170.5 for HPV16 and 18, respectively) than after nonavalent vaccination (265.1 and 22.3 IUs, respectively). The bivalent vaccine commonly induced antibodies against the nonvaccine HPV types 31/33/35/45 or 58. The nonavalent vaccine induced higher antibodies against HPV6/11/31/33/45/52/58 and 35.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available