The nonavalent vaccine: a review of high-risk HPVs and a plea to the CDC.

Autor:	Yusupov A; Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC, USA., Popovsky D; Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC, USA., Mahmood L; Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC, USA., Kim AS; Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC, USA., Akman AE; Georgetown University School of Medicine Washington, DC, USA., Yuan H; Department of Pathology, Georgetown University Medical Center Washington, DC, USA.; Center for Cell Reprogramming, Georgetown University Medical Center Washington, DC, USA.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	American journal of stem cells [Am J Stem Cells] 2019 Dec 15; Vol. 8 (3), pp. 52-64. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Dec 15 (Print Publication: 2019).
Abstrakt:	Two of the leading strategies to prevent cervical cancer are prophylactic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and routine Papanicolaou (Pap) testing. However, regardless of being vaccinated with first-generation (bivalent and quadrivalent) HPV vaccines at the recommended dosing schedule, many women are still found to have low- and high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions. Studies have shown that this is largely due to: (1) first-generation vaccines only protecting against 70% of high-risk HPV types that cause cervical cancer (HPVs 16/18) and (2) vaccinated women being more prone to infection with non-protected high-risk HPV types than unvaccinated women. Fortunately, the FDA recently approved a nonavalent vaccine that protects against 5 additional high-risk HPV types that cause 20% of cervical cancers (HPVs 31/33/45/52/58), which is the only HPV vaccine currently available in the United States. Although the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends the nonavalent vaccine in men and women up to the age of 45 years, it does not recommend the nonavalent vaccine in those previously vaccinated with 3 doses of bivalent or quadrivalent vaccine, deeming them "adequately vaccinated". As this population is most at risk, this review serves to provide background and argue for a change in their recommendation. Competing Interests: None. (AJSC Copyright © 2019.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu