Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)

Introduction: Prophylactic vaccines against human papillomavirus (HPV) are considered the most effective intervention for the control of the burden of HPV-related disease. Objective: To analyze and determine if the nonavalent vaccine compared to the quadrivalent vaccine is more effective as a prophy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Becerra Zúñiga, Patricia, Enríquez Gómez, Shaden, Ruiz Rocha, Laura Fernanda, Palacios Méndez, Pedro Héctor, López Rodríguez, Diego, Arias Ulloa, Raúl, Terrones Saldívar, Ma. del Carmen
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2019
País:México
Institución:UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE AGUASCALIENTES
Repositorio:Luxmédica
Idioma:español
OAI Identifier:oai:revistas.uaa.mx:article/2246
Acceso en línea:https://revistas.uaa.mx/index.php/luxmedica/article/view/2246
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:human papillovirus
HPV
tetravalent vaccine
quadrivalent vaccine
nonavalent vaccine
virus del papiloma humano
VPH
vacuna tetravalente
vacuna cuadrivalente
vacuna nonavalente
id MX_01db4abe535bbd41ad0ae036d2a4e910
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.uaa.mx:article/2246
network_acronym_str MX
network_name_str México
repository_id_str
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
Revisión sistemática de vacuna cuadrivalente vs nonavalente como tratamiento profiláctico para cáncer cervicouterino causado por el virus del papiloma humano (VPH)
title Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
spellingShingle Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
Becerra Zúñiga, Patricia
human papillovirus
HPV
tetravalent vaccine
quadrivalent vaccine
nonavalent vaccine
virus del papiloma humano
VPH
vacuna tetravalente
vacuna cuadrivalente
vacuna nonavalente
title_short Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
title_full Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
title_fullStr Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
title_sort Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Becerra Zúñiga, Patricia
Enríquez Gómez, Shaden
Ruiz Rocha, Laura Fernanda
Palacios Méndez, Pedro Héctor
López Rodríguez, Diego
Arias Ulloa, Raúl
Terrones Saldívar, Ma. del Carmen
author Becerra Zúñiga, Patricia
author_facet Becerra Zúñiga, Patricia
Enríquez Gómez, Shaden
Ruiz Rocha, Laura Fernanda
Palacios Méndez, Pedro Héctor
López Rodríguez, Diego
Arias Ulloa, Raúl
Terrones Saldívar, Ma. del Carmen
author_role author
author2 Enríquez Gómez, Shaden
Ruiz Rocha, Laura Fernanda
Palacios Méndez, Pedro Héctor
López Rodríguez, Diego
Arias Ulloa, Raúl
Terrones Saldívar, Ma. del Carmen
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv human papillovirus
HPV
tetravalent vaccine
quadrivalent vaccine
nonavalent vaccine
virus del papiloma humano
VPH
vacuna tetravalente
vacuna cuadrivalente
vacuna nonavalente
topic human papillovirus
HPV
tetravalent vaccine
quadrivalent vaccine
nonavalent vaccine
virus del papiloma humano
VPH
vacuna tetravalente
vacuna cuadrivalente
vacuna nonavalente
description Introduction: Prophylactic vaccines against human papillomavirus (HPV) are considered the most effective intervention for the control of the burden of HPV-related disease. Objective: To analyze and determine if the nonavalent vaccine compared to the quadrivalent vaccine is more effective as a prophylactic method to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Methods: An electronic review of articles in which the efficacy of each type of vaccine in the population of interest was analyzed, as well as comparative studies of both types of vaccine. Results: The effectiveness of the studies was assessed according to the prevalence of cases of the different types of HPV after the application of the vaccine, immunogenicity demonstrates the creation of antibodies for the different types of HPV. On the other hand, the persistence of antibodies shows if the studies assessed their presence after a specific time (evaluated in each study) and for how long the vaccine's effectiveness was found. Conclusions: The results analyzed from randomized clinical trials have shown that both vaccines are highly effective in preventing the types of high-risk HPVs included in the vaccine (HPVs 16 and 18). Additionally, nonavalent shows clinical efficacy against types 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. LUX MÉDICA AÑO 14, NÚMERO 42, SEPT-DIC 2019, PP 37-48.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-11-19
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.uaa.mx/index.php/luxmedica/article/view/2246
10.33064/42lm20192246
url https://revistas.uaa.mx/index.php/luxmedica/article/view/2246
identifier_str_mv 10.33064/42lm20192246
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.uaa.mx/index.php/luxmedica/article/view/2246/2082
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Lux Médica; Vol. 14 No. 42 (2019); 37 - 47
Lux Médica; Vol. 14 Núm. 42 (2019); 37 - 47
2007-8714
2007-1655
reponame:Luxmédica
instname:UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE AGUASCALIENTES
instacron:UAA
instname_str UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE AGUASCALIENTES
instacron_str UAA
institution UAA
reponame_str Luxmédica
collection Luxmédica
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1858174201238650880
spelling Systematic review of quadrivalent vs. nonavalent vaccine as a prophylactic treatment for cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV)Revisión sistemática de vacuna cuadrivalente vs nonavalente como tratamiento profiláctico para cáncer cervicouterino causado por el virus del papiloma humano (VPH)Becerra Zúñiga, PatriciaEnríquez Gómez, ShadenRuiz Rocha, Laura FernandaPalacios Méndez, Pedro HéctorLópez Rodríguez, DiegoArias Ulloa, RaúlTerrones Saldívar, Ma. del Carmenhuman papillovirusHPVtetravalent vaccinequadrivalent vaccinenonavalent vaccinevirus del papiloma humanoVPHvacuna tetravalentevacuna cuadrivalentevacuna nonavalenteIntroduction: Prophylactic vaccines against human papillomavirus (HPV) are considered the most effective intervention for the control of the burden of HPV-related disease. Objective: To analyze and determine if the nonavalent vaccine compared to the quadrivalent vaccine is more effective as a prophylactic method to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Methods: An electronic review of articles in which the efficacy of each type of vaccine in the population of interest was analyzed, as well as comparative studies of both types of vaccine. Results: The effectiveness of the studies was assessed according to the prevalence of cases of the different types of HPV after the application of the vaccine, immunogenicity demonstrates the creation of antibodies for the different types of HPV. On the other hand, the persistence of antibodies shows if the studies assessed their presence after a specific time (evaluated in each study) and for how long the vaccine's effectiveness was found. Conclusions: The results analyzed from randomized clinical trials have shown that both vaccines are highly effective in preventing the types of high-risk HPVs included in the vaccine (HPVs 16 and 18). Additionally, nonavalent shows clinical efficacy against types 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. LUX MÉDICA AÑO 14, NÚMERO 42, SEPT-DIC 2019, PP 37-48.Introducción: se considera que la vacunación profiláctica contra el virus del papiloma humano (VPH) es laintervención más efectiva para disminuir la prevalencia del cáncer cérvico-uterino; sin embargo, a pesar de laimplementación de programas de vacunación, se han identificado barreras relacionadas con la seguridad y los efectos adversos , motivo por el cual existe una b aja cobertura de ésta. Objetivo: analizar y sintetizar la evidencia disponible acerca de la efectividad de la vacuna cuadrivalente y la nonavalente como método profiláctico para disminuir la incidencia de CaCu. Material y métodos: se realizó una revisión electrónica de artículos en los que se analizaba la eficacia de cada tipo de vacuna en la población de interés, así como estudios comparativos de ambos tipos de vacuna. Resultados: en cuanto a la eficacia de las vacunas, la evidencia científica reporta que, después de la vacunación, existe la formación de anticuerpos contra los diferentes tipos de VPH. También se reporta la persistencia de anticuerpos (evaluado en cada estudio) y por cuánto tiempo se encontró efectividad de la vacuna. En cuanto a la seguridad, se encontró que los efectos locales y sistémicos son más comunes tras la aplicación de la vacuna nonavalente. Conclusiones: los ensayos clínicos aleatorizados analizados permiten establecer el marco de seguridad, eficacia e inmunogenicidad de las vacunas tetravalente y nonavalente para el VPH. Además, han demostrado que ambas vacunas son altamente eficaces en la prevención de la infección por VPH 16 y 18; adicionalmente, la nonavalente muestra eficacia clínica contra los tipos 31, 33, 45, 52 y 58. Se debe reforzar la cobertura de la vacunación en la población blanco. LUX MÉDICA AÑO 14, NÚMERO 42, SEPT-DIC 2019, PP 37-48.Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes2019-11-19info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.uaa.mx/index.php/luxmedica/article/view/224610.33064/42lm20192246Lux Médica; Vol. 14 No. 42 (2019); 37 - 47Lux Médica; Vol. 14 Núm. 42 (2019); 37 - 472007-87142007-1655reponame:Luxmédicainstname:UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE AGUASCALIENTESinstacron:UAAspahttps://revistas.uaa.mx/index.php/luxmedica/article/view/2246/2082info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:revistas.uaa.mx:article/22462024-08-22T19:25:11Z
score 15,812429

Similares en LA Referencia