news

Effectiveness of HPV vaccines Cervarix and Gardasil under question

5.0K
SHARES

Analysis of the designs of Phase II and III efficacy trials for HPV vaccines suggest they overstated their effectiveness against cervical cancer, according to researchers.

young girl receiving a vaccine from a volunteer

Researchers analysing the design of HPV vaccines Cervarix and Gardasil efficacy trials found the Phase II and III trials had methodological problems that could have overstated the effectiveness of these vaccines against HPV.

 

ACCESS your FREE COPY

 


This report addresses the key factors shaping pharmaceutical formulation, including regulation, QC and analysis.

Access the full report now to discover the techniques, tools and innovations that are transforming pharmaceutical formulation, and learn how to position your organisation for long-term success.

What you’ll discover:

  • Key trends shaping the pharmaceutical formulation sector
  • Innovations leading progress in pharmaceutical formulation and how senior professionals can harness their benefits
  • Considerations and best practices when utilising QbD during formulation of oral solid dosage forms
  • And more!

Don’t miss your chance to access this exclusive report ! Access now – it’s free

We found insufficient data to clearly conclude that HPV vaccine prevents the higher-grade abnormal cell changes”

The researchers from Newcastle University and Queen Mary University of London, both UK, found that the trials were not designed to detect cervical cancer because it takes decades to develop; instead they detected low grade abnormal cell changes. These changes, according to the study collaborators, are not clinically important because “they often resolve spontaneously without progressing,” into cancers.

“We found insufficient data to clearly conclude that HPV vaccine prevents the higher-grade abnormal cell changes that can eventually develop into cervical cancer,” said Dr Claire Rees, Lead researcher from the Queen Mary University of London.

Dr Rees continued: “Abnormal cell changes are likely to have been over-diagnosed in the trials because cervical cytology was conducted at 6-12 months rather than at the normal screening interval of 36 months. This, too, means that the trials may have overestimated the efficacy of the vaccine, again because some of the lesions would have regressed spontaneously.”

A further conclusion of the study was that the trial populations did not reflect the real-world target population, predominantly due to the women in the trials being older than the target population.

The researchers concluded that while this evidence is troubling, there is significant evidence that cervical screenings are effective at mitigating the risks of cervical cancer, so should be attended regardless of vaccination status.

The analysis results were published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

Share via
Share via