Home > Search Results

Helps prevent genital warts and cancer of the anus, cervix, vagina, or vulva, which may be caused by human papillomavirus (HPV).

UsesSide effectsLatest evidence reviewsResearch summaries for consumersBrand names

Results: 6

The Health Technology Assessment of bivalent HPV vaccine Cervarix in Italy

This review concluded that human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines (in particular, bivalent HPV vaccine) could have a great impact and would be cost-effective. This summary of a full Italian-language report provided limited reporting of review methodology, but it appeared that the conclusions were likely to be reliable although they were necessarily based on a surrogate outcome.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet] - Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK).

Version: 2010

HPV vaccine to protect against cervical cancer

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infections play a critical role in the development of cervical cancer. There is now a vaccine against these sexually transmitted viruses. It targets the most common of the carcinogenic (cancer-causing) HPV viruses, but does not provide complete protection against cancer.Over the past few decades the number of women with cervical cancer has decreased drastically in some countries, including Germany. This kind of cancer is still a life-threatening disease, though. Specific forms of human papillomavirus (HPV) infections are considered to be the main cause of cervical cancer. HPV infections occur in humans only, affecting skin and mucous membrane cells. They can be spread through direct contact with infected skin or mucous membranes. HPV infections usually go unnoticed, do not cause any symptoms and clear up on their own.More than 100 different strains of HPV are currently known. Some cause warts to grow on the skin (also called papillomas). About 40 different HPV strains can infect skin and mucous membranes, especially in the genital area. The viruses are transmitted sexually, but they are spread through contact with skin and mucous membranes, and not through bodily fluids.Because these HPV viruses are very common, it is estimated that as many as 90% of all sexually active women and girls become infected.

Informed Health Online [Internet] - Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG).

Version: January 16, 2014

Safety of Vaccines Used for Routine Immunization in the United States

To conduct a systematic review of the literature on the safety of vaccines recommended for routine immunization of children, adolescents, and adults in the United States as of 2011.

Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments - Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US).

Version: July 2014
Show search results within this document

Screening for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet]

We undertook this systematic review to assist the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in updating its 2003 recommendation on cervical cancer screening. During the planning phase of this evidence review on cervical cancer screening, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) decided to fund a separate modeling study to be conducted simultaneously. The USPSTF determined that the scope for both the systematic review and the modeling study would focus on important clinical questions that could inform effective use of screening in practice. This systematic review focuses on when to begin screening and on updating test accuracy and harms data on liquid-based cytology (LBC) and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, either alone or in combination with cytology. The modeling study focuses on the effectiveness of strategies that use different ages at which to begin screening and different screening intervals.1 These two reports are intended to provide the USPSTF with complementary information to update its recommendation on cervical cancer screening.

Evidence Syntheses - Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US).

Version: May 2011
Show search results within this document

Safety, tolerability and side effects of human papillomavirus vaccines: a systematic quantitative review

Recently, many studies have evaluated HPV vaccine safety and adverse effects. Two vaccines have been recently evaluated in randomized controlled trials: the bivalent vaccine for HPV 16 and 18 (Cervarix, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium) and the quadrivalent vaccine for HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 (Gardasil, Merck and Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ). We have performed a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials in which HPV vaccines were compared with placebo regarding safety, tolerability and adverse effects. Studies were searched up to March 2013 in the databases: Pubmed, Embase, Scielo and Cancerlit. Odds Ratios (OR) of most incident adverse effects were obtained. Twelve reports, involving 29,540 subjects, were included. In the HPV 16/18 group, the most frequently reported events related to the vaccine were pain (OR 3.29; 95% CI: 3.00-3.60), swelling (OR 3.14; 95% CI: 2.79-3.53) and redness (OR 2.41; 95% CI: 2.17-2.68). For the HPV 6/11/16/18 group the events were pain (OR 2.88; 95% CI: 2.42-3.43) and swelling (OR 2.65; 95% CI: 2.0-3.44). Concerning the HPV 16/18 vaccine, pain was the most common outcome detected. These effects can be due to a possible VLP-related inflammation process. Fatigue was the most relevant general effect observed followed by fever, gastrointestinal symptoms, and headache. In the HPV 6/11/16/18 group, only general symptoms, pain and swelling were observed. Pain and swelling were the most frequent. Comparing HPV 16/18 to HPV 6/11/16/18 vaccines, the former presented more adverse effects, perhaps because there are many more trials evaluating the bivalent vaccine. Other studies are needed to clarify this issue.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet] - Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK).

Version: 2014

Cross-protective efficacy of two human papillomavirus vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The extent of cross-protection is a key element in the choice of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine to use in vaccination programmes. We compared the cross-protective efficacy of the bivalent vaccine (HPV 16 and 18; Cervarix, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium) and quadrivalent vaccine (HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18; Gardasil, Merck, Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA) against non-vaccine type HPVs.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet] - Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK).

Version: 2012

Systematic Reviews in PubMed

See all (17)...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...