As expected, virus neutralizing titers induced by sIPV were higher for Sabin-strains than for wild poliovirus strains, whereas titers induced by wIPV were higher for the wild poliovirus strains. This difference should be taken into account in the selection of the minimal level of D-antigen units, especially for type 1, being the only wild poliovirus
that is still endemic. Several studies have shown that Sabin poliovirus type 2 has a lower immunogenicity in rats in comparison with a wIPV reference standard , , ,  and . Yet, the data presented here show that in infants, median titers against Sabin-2 poliovirus induced Buparlisib ic50 by sIPV were comparable with the reference group (wIPV) and although the median titer induced by sIPV (low- and middle-dose) against the virulent strain (MEF-1) was lower than that induced by the reference, the level of wild type 2 poliovirus titers equalled the wild type 1 titers induced by wIPV. Overall, these results indicate that Sabin-2 in sIPV is sufficiently immunogenic. Because 3-deazaneplanocin A research buy the D-antigen amount is quantified in an ELISA using monoclonal antibodies and there is no universal standard for the DU assay, no one-on-one comparison of D-antigen levels can be made between vaccines produced with different poliovirus strains. For the same reason,
the D-antigen levels reported for Sabin-IPV products from different manufacturers ,  and  cannot be compared, since the various laboratories may use different monoclonal antibodies in their D-antigen ELISAs . why As a result, no uniform dosage has been proposed for sIPV products. Three doses of sIPV or adjuvanted sIPV were well-tolerated and induced seroprotective antibody titers against both virulent and Sabin-poliovirus strains in infants at all dose-levels and comparable with wIPV. The authors would like to thank Deborah Kleijne of the RIVM for
her assistance during the study, Deborah Moore, Yiting Zhang, Sharla McDonald, William Hendley, of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA for performing the virus neutralization assays and the members of the data safety monitoring board: Dr. Leo Visser, Dr. Hans Rümke, Dr. Sybil Geelen and Henriët Nienhuis. Conflict of interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest. “
“Human papillomavirus (HPV) can cause cervical cancer, cervical preinvasive lesions and genital warts  and . Clinical trials show that HPV vaccines effectively protect against cervical preinvasive lesions caused by the HPV vaccine types  and , and recent studies indicate that HPV vaccination already has reduced the incidence of genital warts at the population level  and . Since the HPV types that cause cervical disease are sexually transmitted, there has been a concern that HPV vaccination may lead to increased sexual risk-taking  and , which has attracted considerable mass media attention .