effective against HPV virus and indirectly also works against cervical cancer in randomized double-blind studies at both young women of 15 to 25 years as in women between 24 and 45 years. Article update 1 February 2012

12 June 2009: source: The Lancet, Volume 373, Issue 9679, Pages 1949-1957, 6 June 2009

After all the commotion surrounding the vaccination against the HPV virus in young girls, see inter alia articles under failed vaccination program is also on this page, in the Lancet of June 2009 published a new randomized phase III study that proves that vaccination of women between 24 and 45 years yet also be protected by a vaccination against the HPV virus and certain forms of therefore indirectly against cervical cancer.

RESULTS:women received at least 1 1910 and 1907 women vaccination at least 1 placebo. In the per-protocol population, the effect was established according to the first endpoint (disease or infection related to HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18) 90 · 5% (95% CI 73 · 7 — 97 · 5, four of the 1615 cases in the vaccination group versus the placebo group from 41 in 1607) and 83 · 1% (50 · 6 — 95 · 8, 4 from 1601 cases versus 23 from 1579 cases) established according to the second endpoint (disease or infection related to HPV 16 and 18 alone). In the intention-to-treat population was the effect according to the first endpoint 30 · 9% (95% CI 11 · 1 — 46 · 5, 108/1886 cases vs 154/1883 cases) aen the effect according to second endpoint was 22 · 6% (− 2 · 9 to 41 · 9, 90/1886 cases vs 115/1883 cases), because infection and disease were present already during the start. We proposed no serious side effects. related vaccination

Frankly I have too little medical knowledge to form an opinion on the matter but no doubt your doctor will be able to cope. What is not there after how much time the test is done but the difference between placebo group and vaccination signiicant group was in favor of the vaccination group. And even in women who already had the HPV virus or had already first symptoms of cervical cancer at the start of the vaccination still showed a protective effect by the vaccine. Or everyone should be vaccinated right now but is of course another story. This morning a great expository article about risks and costs of werkeljke protection and overall vaccination against the HPV virus or baarmoderhalskanker ... Here is the abstract as published in The Lancet ... Under this abstract abstract State of the phase III study from 2004 which proves that vaccination of young girls and women, age 15 to 25 years, is effective and which lay at the root of the vaccination programme which has been so much criticism.

The Lancet, Volume 373, Issue 9679, Pages 1949-1957, 6 June 2009

Editors ' note: Sexually active women risk contracting human papillomavirus (HPV), which causes genital warts and cervical cancer. Although a quadrivalent HPV (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) vaccine has shown efficacy in young women (ages 16 – 23 years), the efficacy of the same vaccine in older women (age 24 – 45 years) is unknown. This phase III trial was done to test the vaccine efficacy in the older age range of women with no history of genital warts or cervical cancer. This prophylactic HPV vaccine seems to be efficacious in women aged 24-45 years.
Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of human papillomavirus quadrivalent (types 6, 11, 16, 18) recombinant vaccine in women aged 24 — 45 years: a randomised, double-blind trial
Prof Nubia Muñoz MD a bManalastas Ricardo MD MDPitisuttithum Punee Damrong Tresukosol MD c d eJoseph Monsonego MDKevin Ault MDChristine Clavel PhD f g aJoaquin Luna MDEvan Myers MDSara Hood BS h i iOliver Bautista Janine Bryan PhD PhD i
onclick = "JavaScript: getListOfAuthorArticles (' The Lancet ', ' Frank J Taddeo '); return false;" href = "fieldName = Authors & searchTerm =/search/results? + Taddeo > Frank J Taddeo Frank J"Mark T Esser PhD PhD i i iScott Vuocolo PhD MDRichard M Haupt Eliav Barr MD i i i,Alfred Saah MD,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Summary
Background
Although the peak incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection occurs in most populations within 5 — 10 years of first sexual experience, all women remain at risk for acquisition of HPV infections. We tested the safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of the quadrivalent HPV, (types 6, 11, 16, 18) L1 virus-like-particle vaccine in women aged 24 — 45 years.
Methods
Women aged 24 — 45 years with no history of genital warts or cervical disease were enrolled from community health centres, academic health centres, and primary health-care providers into an ongoing multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel, double-blind study. Participants were allocated by computer-generated quadrivalent HPV vaccine schedule to receive (n = 1911) or placebo (n = 1908) at day 1, and months 2 and 6. All study site investigators and personnel, study participants, monitors, and central laboratory personnel were blinded to treatment allocation. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were 6 months ' or more duration of infection and cervical and external genital disease due to HPV 6, 11, 16, 18; HPV 16 and 18 alone and due to. Primary efficacy analyses were done in a per-protocol population, but intention-to-treat analyses were also under tasks. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00090220.
Findings
1910 women received at least one dose of vaccine and 1907 at least one dose or placebo. In the per-protocol population, efficacy against the first coprimary endpoint (disease or infection related to HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18) was 90 · 5% (95% CI 73 · 7 — 97 · 5, four in the vaccine group or 1615 cases vs 41/1607 in the placebo group) and 83 · 1% (50 · 6 — 95 · 8, four of 1601 cases vs 23/1579 cases) against the second coprimary endpoint (disease or infection related to HPV 16 and 18 alone). In the intention-to-treat population, coprimary efficacy against the first endpoint was 30 · 9% (95% CI 11 · 1 — 46 · 5, 108/1886 cases vs 154/1883 cases) and against the second coprimary endpoint was 22 · 6% (− 2 · 9 to 41 · 9, 90/1886 cases vs 115/1883 cases), since infection and disease were present at baseline. We recorded no vaccine-related serious adverse events.
Interpretation
The quadrivalent HPV vaccine is efficacious in women aged 24 — 45 years not infected with the relevant HPV types at enrolment.
Funding
Merck (USA).

17 november 2004: source: The Lancet-19 november 2004: Lancet 2004; 363: 1757-65

Researchers have found a vaccine against the human papillomavirus that in 95% of cases the cause of cervical cancer. In The Lancet of 19 november 2004 , the full study report with statistics and methods used etc. of these randomized double-blind study conducted worldwide in many hospitals including-Delft Diagnostic Laboratory, Delft, Netherlands (W Quint PhD) and GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium in Belgium (D Jenkins MD, T Zahav PhD);.The vaccine would be 100% the two most common forms of the carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types, HPV-16 and HPV-18 deaths and 70% of cervical cancer cases, which can be prevented.

Rightly made an alert me on the following: mailgroeplid
" it seems to me equally correct to say that 80% of all women with this virus carries (only with this virus was not dense-flowered to affected) the fact that there is still no HPV-16 and HPV test is offered which detects-18 has to do with the cost!!!! Smears were assessed as good indeed in retrospect be bleaching often error with all consequences. There are also new forms of this virus again known who can slip into cervical cancer, it seems that cancer always one step ahead lies on the laboratory. In other countries it begins much earlier with smears, Netherlands runs as usual offering again behind this at the expense of the 750 women per year to deal with this terrible kind of cancer. Furthermore, this vaccine does not work if cervix cancer originated ".

Here a short summary of the study in English but seems to us to be clear for everyone and I think the full study report is also interesting for doctors and nurses.

Efficacy of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine in prevention of infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: a randomised controlled trial

Diane M Harper, Eduardo l. Franco, Cosette Wheeler, Daron G Ferris, David Jenkins, Anne Zahav, Bruce Innis Schuind, Toufik, Paulo Naud, Newton S De Carvalho, Cecilia M Roteli-Martins, Julio Teixeira, Mark m. Blatter, Abner P Korn, Wim Quint, Gary Dubin, for the GlaxoSmithKline HPV Vaccine Study Group *-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Lancet 2004; 364: 1757-65--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Correspondence to: Dr. Diane m. Harper,Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Dartmouth Medical School, Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Research Group, Rubin 880, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA diane.m.harper @ dartmouth. edu

Background:

Vaccination against the most common oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types, HPV-16 and HPV-18, could prevent development of up to 70% or cervical cancers worldwide. We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial to assess the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of a bivalent HPV 16/18 L1 virus-like particle vaccine for the prevention of incident and persistent infection with these two virus types, associated cervical cytological abnormalities, and precancerous lesions. Methods We randomised women between 15-25 years of age 1113 to receive three doses of the vaccine formulated with AS04 adjuvant or of either on a placebo 0 month, 1 month, and 6 month schedule in North America and Brazil. Women were assessed for HPV infection by cervical cytology and self-obtained samples for up to 27 months, and cervicovaginal for vaccine safety and immunogenicity. Findings In the according-to-protocol analyses, vaccine efficacy was 91 · 6% (95% CI 64 · 5-98 · 0) against incident infection and 100% against persistent infection (47 · 0-100) with HPV-16/18. In the intention-to-treat analyses, vaccine efficacy was 95 · 1% (63 · 5-99 · 3) against persistent cervical infection with HPV-16/18 and 92 · 9% (70 · 0-98 · 3) against cytological abnormalities associated with HPV-16/18 infection. The vaccine was generally safe, well tolerated, and highly immunogenic.

The bivalent HPV vaccine was efficacious in prevention Interpretation or cervical infections with HPV-16 incident and persistent and HPV-18, and associated abnormalities and cytological lesions. Vaccination against such infections could substantially reduce incidence of cervical cancer.