Intralesional bivalent and quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccines didn't significantly enhance the response of multiple anogenital warts when co-administered with intralesional Candida antigen immunotherapy. A randomized controlled trial.
Anogenital warts
Bivalent HPV vaccine
Candida antigen
Immunotherapy
Quadrivalent HPV vaccine
Treatment
Journal
Archives of dermatological research
ISSN: 1432-069X
Titre abrégé: Arch Dermatol Res
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8000462
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
08
06
2023
accepted:
02
08
2023
revised:
08
06
2023
medline:
1
11
2023
pubmed:
13
8
2023
entrez:
12
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Treatment of anogenital warts (AGWs) is challenging. Candida antigen immunotherapy has been proven to be a safe and relatively effective therapeutic modality; nevertheless, some patients may experience a partial or no response. Combining Candida antigen with other immunotherapies has been proposed to improve the cure rate. Immunotherapy with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines has been tried with conflicting outcomes. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of intralesional Candida antigen, either alone or in combination with intralesional bivalent or quadrivalent HPV vaccines, for treating multiple AGWs. Eighty patients with multiple AGWs were included and randomly assigned to four equal groups: group A treated with intralesional Candida antigen only; group B treated with intralesional bivalent HPV vaccine (Cervarix) and Candida; group C treated with intralesional quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Gardasil) and Candida; and group D (control) treated with intralesional saline. Complete clearance of lesions was detected in 40%, 20%, and 60% of patients in Candida monotherapy, Cervarix/Candida, and Gardasil/Candida groups, respectively, whereas 40%, 60%, and 20% of patients in the three groups, respectively, showed partial response. Only 10% of the control group had a partial response. Therapeutic outcomes were significantly better in the three treatment groups compared to the control group, with no statistically significant difference between the Candida monotherapy group and the combination groups, but the response was significantly better in the Gardasil/Candida group than in the Cervarix/Candida group. No statistically significant difference was found between the studied groups regarding the development of side effects. Moreover, no recurrence was detected in any of the groups throughout the 3-month follow-up period. Based on our results, combining intralesional HPV vaccines with Candida antigen immunotherapy may have no significant benefit for treating multiple AGWs. Candida antigen may be recommended as a relatively effective and inexpensive therapeutic modality. The combination of Gardasil and Candida was also effective but very expensive. The results of the Cervarix/Candida combination were unsatisfactory. This clinical trial was registered and approved prospectively by the ethical review board at Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37573268
doi: 10.1007/s00403-023-02698-z
pii: 10.1007/s00403-023-02698-z
pmc: PMC10615931
doi:
Substances chimiques
Human Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine Quadrivalent, Types 6, 11, 16, 18
0
Papillomavirus Vaccines
0
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2813-2823Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
JAAD Case Rep. 2017 Jul 26;3(4):367-369
pubmed: 28795126
Urologiia. 2016 Nov;(5):47-51
pubmed: 28248020
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018 Aug;79(2):377-378
pubmed: 29339242
Dermatol Ther. 2022 May;35(5):e15384
pubmed: 35170176
Arch Dermatol. 2005 Dec;141(12):1606-7
pubmed: 16365274
Clin Exp Dermatol. 1994 May;19(3):210-6
pubmed: 8033378
Dermatol Ther. 2016 May;29(3):197-207
pubmed: 26991521
Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Dec;53 Suppl 3:S143-52
pubmed: 22080267
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 6;18(1):125
pubmed: 30400777
Int J Dermatol. 2017 Oct;56(10):1003-1009
pubmed: 28791682
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020 Mar;19(3):758-762
pubmed: 31328869
J Med Virol. 2011 Aug;83(8):1345-50
pubmed: 21678438
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014;10(12):3446-54
pubmed: 25483691
Acta Dermatovenerol Alp Pannonica Adriat. 2019 Mar;28(1):21-26
pubmed: 30901065
Dermatol Ther. 2022 Jun;35(6):e15440
pubmed: 35285995
JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Mar;149(3):370-2
pubmed: 23552967
Indian J Dermatol. 2013 Sep;58(5):360-5
pubmed: 24082180
Perspect Clin Res. 2013 Jan;4(1):49-52
pubmed: 23533982
Health Technol Assess. 2020 Sep;24(47):1-86
pubmed: 32975189
Indian Dermatol Online J. 2016 Sep-Oct;7(5):364-370
pubmed: 27730031
J Pediatr. 2018 Mar;194:259-259.e1
pubmed: 29274887
Int Braz J Urol. 2019 Mar-Apr;45(2):361-368
pubmed: 30785696
Dermatol Ther. 2022 Oct;35(10):e15762
pubmed: 36056784
Braz J Microbiol. 2020 Dec;51(4):1673-1681
pubmed: 32594377
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020 Jan;82(1):94-100
pubmed: 31369771
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2008 Jan;6(1):67-78
pubmed: 18079743