3.8 Review

Therapeutic vaccines for high-risk HPV-associated diseases

Journal

PAPILLOMAVIRUS RESEARCH
Volume 5, Issue -, Pages 46-58

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.pvr.2017.12.006

Keywords

Therapeutic vaccine; HPV; E6 and E7; Cervical cancer; Plant-based production

Categories

Funding

  1. Poliomyelitis Research Foundation (PRF) [15/12]
  2. National Research Foundation of South Africa (NRF)
  3. Cancer Association of South Africa (CANSA)
  4. Carnegie Corporation of New York
  5. PRF
  6. University of Cape Town
  7. NRF

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide, and it is estimated that Human papillomavirus (HPV) related cancers account for 5% of all human cancers. Current HPV vaccines are extremely effective at preventing infection and neoplastic disease; however, they are prophylactic and do not clear established infections. Therapeutic vaccines which trigger cell-mediated immune responses for the treatment of established infections and malignancies are therefore required. The E6 and E7 early genes are ideal targets for vaccine therapy due to their role in disruption of the cell cycle and their constitutive expression in premalignant and malignant tissues. Several strategies have been investigated for the development of therapeutic vaccines, including live-vector, nucleic acid, peptide, protein-based and cell-based vaccines as well as combinatorial approaches, with several vaccine candidates progressing to clinical trials. With the current understanding of the HPV life cycle, molecular mechanisms of infection, carcinogenesis, tumour biology, the tumour microenvironment and immune response mechanisms, an approved HPV therapeutic vaccine seems to be a goal not far from being achieved. In this article, the status of therapeutic HPV vaccines in clinical trials are reviewed, and the potential for plant-based vaccine production platforms described.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available