DOCSLIB.ORG

Gardasil and Cervarix Are Not Interchangeable

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gardasil and Cervarix Are Not Interchangeable JANUARY 2010 • WWW.SKINANDALLERGYNEWS.COM INFECTIOUS DISEASES 21 HPV Vaccine Exhibits Efficacy Beyond 6 Years riod of time, compared of the follow-up study. lowing clearance of a natural infection in Major Finding: At 6.4 years, vaccine efficacy with the same antigens At 6.4 years, vaccine efficacy against in- a previous study (Lancet 2007;369:2161-70). against incident HPV infection was 95% in the ac- cording-to-protocol cohort. adjuvanted with alu- cident HPV-16 or HPV-18 infection in the Safety profiles of the HPV-16/18 vac- minum salts alone, ac- ATP analysis was 95.3%, and long-term cine and placebo were similar, with ap- Source of Data: A three-country, 27-site study of cording to the GSK efficacy against persistent infection was proximately one-third of each group re- 1,113 women aged 15-26 years. Vaccine HPV-007 Study 100% at both 6 and 12 months. In the to- porting any adverse event, 10% or fewer Disclosures: The study, led by Dr. Romanowski, was Group, led by Dr. Bar- tal vaccinated cohort analysis, protection reporting a serious adverse event, and VITALS funded by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Biologicals, bara Romanowski against cervical intraepithelial neoplasia less than 10% reporting new-onset chron- manufacturer of Cervarix. Dr. Clifford declared that he had no conflicts of interest. (Lancet 2009 Dec. 3 grade 1 or higher associated with either ic diseases. None of the serious adverse [doi:10.1016/S0140- vaccine HPV type was 100%. For the events was judged to be related to the vac- 6736(09)61567-1]). nonvaccine types HPV-31 and -45, vac- cine, and there were no deaths. BY MIRIAM E. TUCKER Of 1,113 women included in the initial cine efficacy against incident infection In an accompanying editorial, Dr. three-country, 27-site study, a total of was 59.8% and 77.7%, while overall effi- Gary M. Clifford wrote that the data he human papillomavirus 16/18 700 completed the follow-up study. The cacy against any cervical intraepithelial showing no evidence of further decline vaccine showed efficacy, sustained total vaccinated cohort included 560 neoplasia grade 2 or higher independent from 3 to 6 years are “perhaps the most Timmunogenicity, and continued women in the vaccine group and 553 in of HPV type was 71.9%, said Dr. Ro- interesting” because they suggest that safety for up to 6.4 years in a combination the placebo group, while the according- manowski of the University of Alberta, mean antibody concentrations should of initial and follow-up placebo-con- to-protocol (ATP) efficacy cohort in- Edmonton, and her associates. remain well above those associated with trolled studies involving more than 1,000 cluded 465 in the vaccine group and 454 Almost all vaccine recipients (99%) re- natural infection long into the future. women aged 15-26 years. in the placebo group. At baseline, all had mained seropositive for anti–HPV-16 and The target age of vaccination is a bal- The human papillomavirus (HPV) vac- normal cervical cytology and were neg- anti–HPV-18 total IgG antibodies. After a ance between “being early enough to cine, Cervarix, is now licensed in the ative for both HPV-16 and -18. peak response at 7 months, geometric catch girls before sexual debut, but late United States, Europe, and elsewhere The mean follow-up period from the mean titers for both antibodies reached a enough to provide an as yet unknown du- around the world. It contains the HPV start of the initial study was 5.9 years, plateau between 18 and 24 months post ration of immunity that protects during as types 16 and 18 adjuvanted with ASO4, with a maximum duration of 6.4 years. vaccination, and remained stable there- many subsequent years of sexual activity comprising aluminum salt and an im- The study population was racially di- after. During months 63-76, antibody con- as possible,” wrote Dr. Clifford of the In- munostimulatory molecule that has verse, with a mean age of 20 years centrations against HPV-16 and HPV-18 ternational Agency for Research on Can- been shown to produce higher antibody (range 15-26 years) at entry to the ini- were at least 13-fold and 12-fold higher cer, Lyon, France (Lancet 2009 Dec. 3 titers that are sustained over a longer pe- tial study and 23 years at the beginning than were concentrations recorded fol- [doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61789-X]). ■ EXPERT OPINION Gardasil and Cervarix Are Not Interchangeable ith the licensure of Glaxo- Although both vaccines are manufac- prevention of vulvar and vaginal in- other vaccine that could have prevent- WSmithKline’s human papillo- tured with similar technology using traepithelial neoplasias. ed it? Conversely, a male or female pa- mavirus vaccine Cervarix in October, we viruslike particles, Cervarix contains a Although not specifically mentioned tient given Cervarix later develops gen- will soon have two vaccines that prevent novel adjuvant, ASO4, that is believed to in Gardasil’s label, there is evidence that ital warts, or a female develops cervical cervical cancer in women. But they’re be responsible for its ability to generate HPV strains 6 and 11, while not associat- atypia associated with HPV-6 or -11. not interchangeable, and this could lead a greater antibody response to HPV-16 ed with cervical cancer, are responsible for Might these patients similarly feel that to problems. and -18, compared with Gardasil. 8%-10% of cases of CIN 1 (mild atypia). they were denied the chance to have Cervarix is expected to join Merck’s According to a head-to-head compari- These lesions typically resolve, and prevented those outcomes? Gardasil on the U.S. market in February. son conducted by GSK, geometric mean guidelines from the American College of Who decides which vaccine is used? In For the first time ever in vaccine histo- titers of serum neutralizing antibodies Obstetricians and Gynecologists do not managed care settings, the decision is of- ry, we will have a situation in which two ranged from 2.3- to 4.8-fold higher for recommend intervention beyond moni- ten made based on cost when vaccines competing vaccines have very different HPV-16 and 6.8- to 9.1-fold higher for toring after CIN 1 is recognized, with the are equivalent, but what about the HPV components and adjuvants HPV-18 after vaccination with intent to intervene only if the lesion vaccines where the products are not that could complicate the de- Cervarix, compared with Gar- progresses to CIN 2. However, in prac- equivalent? The same goes for the man- cision for practicing physi- dasil, across all ages (Hum. tice women often request that the lesions ufacturer-run vaccine buying groups that cians—as well as insurers Vaccin. 2009;5:705-19). be removed, and their physicians often offer discounts to increasing numbers of and buying groups—regard- Although not proven, we do so, thereby incurring excess time, participating physicians who sign con- ing which one to use. I think might infer from those data money, and some risk. Gardasil could po- tracts that impose strict limits on the we need to view human pa- that Cervarix might provide tentially reduce a significant number of amount of vaccine that can be purchased pillomavirus (HPV) vaccines longer-lasting protection those procedures. outside of the specified brands. as exceptions to the usual against HPV serotypes 16 and Meanwhile, data included in the label This has never happened before with rules of “equivalent and in- 18 and, therefore, a longer for Cervarix show that it provides cross- vaccines: The two competing brands are terchangeable” and consider duration of time before a protection against the carcinogenic HPV not interchangeable. I believe that health stocking both. BY MICHAEL E. booster is needed. strain 31, which is responsible for a small plans and vaccine buying groups need to Patients should be in- PICHICHERO, M.D. Both companies are cur- yet significant proportion of cervical recognize these factors and grant an ex- formed of the features of rently studying duration of cancer cases. ception to HPV vaccines. each vaccine, and the decision to use protection with their respective vaccines, In one landmark study, serotype 31 I think we all should stock both in our one or the other should be made with and a just-published study showed sus- accounted for 3.4% of squamous cell practices, and explain the differences to informed consent. tained efficacy and immunogenicity of cancers in 1,739 patients (N. Engl. J. parents. I plan to distribute pamphlets to Most clinicians know that both vac- Cervarix up to 6.4 years (Lancet 2009 Med. 2003;348:518-27). Gardasil’s label, patients and families and let them cines protect against HPV serotypes 16 Dec. 3 [doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61567- in contrast, states that it has not demon- choose, with signatures confirming in- and 18, the dominant causes of cervical 1]). For both vaccines, we should have an- strated cross-protection against diseases formed consent. cancer. But Gardasil also protects against swers before current vaccinees begin to caused by HPV strains not included in I serve as a consultant to both GSK and HPV-6 and -11, primarily associated with lose protection. the vaccine. Merck & Co. and have shared this infor- genital warts, and has recently received Both vaccines are indicated for the These differences may seem slight, mation with both companies. approval for use in males, which Cer- prevention of cervical cancer and cer- but consider a case in which a young This is going to be complicated.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • HPV Vaccine Safety - Vaccine Safety
    CDC - HPV Vaccine Safety - Vaccine Safety Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to navigation Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options CDC Home CDC 24/7: Saving Lives. Protecting People.™ Search The CDC Vaccine Safety Vaccine Safety Vaccines Safety Basics Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis Vaccines: DTaP, Td, and Tdap Haemophilus Influenzae Type B (Hib) Hib Summary Human Papillomavirus (HPV) FAQs about HPV Vaccine Safety FAQ: Gardasil Vaccine recall JAMA Report Summary Information from FDA and CDC on Gardasil and its Safety (Archived) Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) MMR Vaccine Safety Studies Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Varicella (MMRV) Information on the VSD MMRV Vaccine Safety Study MMRV Vaccine Safety Studies MMRV and Febrile Seizures Rotavirus Varicella Addressing Common Concerns Adjuvants Autism Vaccine not associated with autism CDC Statement: 2004 Pediatrics Paper CDC Statement on Pandemrix Fainting (Syncope) FAQs about Fainting (Syncope) After Vaccination Childhood Vaccines and Febrile Seizures Influenza Season 2012-2013 Influenza Season 2010-2011 GBS GBS and Menactra Meningococcal Vaccine FAQs about GBS and Menactra Meningococcal Vaccine IOM Assessment of Studies on Childhood Immunization Schedule IOM Report on Adverse Effects of Vaccines Pregnancy and Influenza Vaccine Safety Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) Thimerosal http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/HPV/index.html[10/13/2014 5:59:00 PM] CDC - HPV Vaccine Safety - Vaccine Safety CDC Study on Thimerosal and Risk of Autism
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 and Cancer: from Basic Mechanisms to Vaccine Development Using Nanotechnology
    International Immunopharmacology 90 (2021) 107247 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Immunopharmacology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/intimp Review COVID-19 and cancer: From basic mechanisms to vaccine development using nanotechnology Hyun Jee Han a,*, Chinekwu Nwagwu b, Obumneme Anyim c, Chinedu Ekweremadu d, San Kim e a University College London, Department of Neonatology, United Kingdom b Department of Pharmaceutics, University of Nigeria Nsukka, Nigeria c Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital Ituku-Ozalla, Enugu, Nigeria d Department of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Nigeria e Basildon and Thurrock University Hospital, United Kingdom ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV- COVID-19 2), is a global pandemic which has induced unprecedented ramifications,severely affecting our society due to the Cancer long incubation time, unpredictably high prevalence and lack of effective vaccines. One of the interesting notions Vaccine development is that there is an association between COVID-19 and cancer. Cancer patients seem to exhibit exacerbated Pharmaceutics conditions and a higher mortality rate when exposed to the virus. Therefore, vaccines are the promising solution Nanotechnology to minimise the problem amongst cancer patients threatened by the new viral strains. However, there are still limitations to be considered, including the efficacy of COVID vaccines for immunocompromised individuals, possible interactions between the vaccine and cancer, and personalised medicine. Not only to eradicate the pandemic, but also to make it more effective for immunocompromised patients who are suffering from cancer, a successful vaccine platform is required through the implementation of nanotechnology which can also enable scalable manufacturing and worldwide distribution along with its faster and precise delivery.
    [Show full text]
  • Vaccines for Preteens
    | DISEASES and the VACCINES THAT PREVENT THEM | INFORMATION FOR PARENTS Vaccines for Preteens: What Parents Should Know Last updated JANUARY 2017 Why does my child need vaccines now? to get vaccinated. The best time to get the flu vaccine is as soon as it’s available in your community, ideally by October. Vaccines aren’t just for babies. Some of the vaccines that While it’s best to be vaccinated before flu begins causing babies get can wear off as kids get older. And as kids grow up illness in your community, flu vaccination can be beneficial as they may come in contact with different diseases than when long as flu viruses are circulating, even in January or later. they were babies. There are vaccines that can help protect your preteen or teen from these other illnesses. When should my child be vaccinated? What vaccines does my child need? A good time to get these vaccines is during a yearly health Tdap Vaccine checkup. Your preteen or teen can also get these vaccines at This vaccine helps protect against three serious diseases: a physical exam required for sports, school, or camp. It’s a tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (whooping cough). good idea to ask the doctor or nurse every year if there are any Preteens should get Tdap at age 11 or 12. If your teen didn’t vaccines that your child may need. get a Tdap shot as a preteen, ask their doctor or nurse about getting the shot now. What else should I know about these vaccines? These vaccines have all been studied very carefully and are Meningococcal Vaccine safe.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplemental Information and Guidance for Vaccination Providers Regarding Use of 9-Valent HPV Vaccine
    Supplemental information and guidance for vaccination providers regarding use of 9-valent HPV A 9-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine (9vHPV, Gardasil 9, Merck & Co.) was licensed for use in females and males in December 2014.1,2,3,4 The 9vHPV was the third HPV vaccine licensed in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); the other vaccines are bivalent HPV vaccine (2vHPV, Cervarix, GlaxoSmithKline), licensed for use in females, and quadrivalent HPV vaccine (4vHPV, Gardasil, Merck & Co.), licensed for use in females and males.5 In February 2015, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended 9vHPV as one of three HPV vaccines that can be used for routine vaccination of females and one of two HPV vaccines for routine vaccination of males.6 After the end of 2016, only 9vHPV will be distributed in the United States. In October 2016, ACIP updated HPV vaccination recommendations regarding dosing schedules.7 CDC now recommends two doses of HPV vaccine (0, 6–12 month schedule) for persons starting the vaccination series before the 15th birthday. Three doses of HPV vaccine (0, 1–2, 6 month schedule) continue to be recommended for persons starting the vaccination series on or after the 15th birthday and for persons with certain immunocompromising conditions. Guidance is needed for persons who started the series with 2vHPV or 4vHPV and may be completing the series with 9vHPV. The information below summarizes some of the recommendations included in ACIP Policy Notes and provides additional guidance.5-7 Information about the vaccines What are some of the similarities and differences between the three HPV vaccines? y Each of the three HPV vaccines is a noninfectious, virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine.
    [Show full text]
  • Adenoviral Vector COVID-19 Vaccines: Process and Cost Analysis
    processes Article Adenoviral Vector COVID-19 Vaccines: Process and Cost Analysis Rafael G. Ferreira 1,* , Neal F. Gordon 2, Rick Stock 2 and Demetri Petrides 3 1 Intelligen Brasil, Sao Paulo 01227-200, Brazil 2 BDO USA, LLP, Boston, MA 02110, USA; [email protected] (N.F.G.); [email protected] (R.S.) 3 Intelligen, Inc., Scotch Plains, NJ 07076, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has motivated the rapid development of numerous vaccines that have proven effective against SARS-CoV-2. Several of these successful vaccines are based on the adenoviral vector platform. The mass manufacturing of these vaccines poses great challenges, especially in the context of a pandemic where extremely large quantities must be produced quickly at an affordable cost. In this work, two baseline processes for the production of a COVID-19 adenoviral vector vaccine, B1 and P1, were designed, simulated and economically evaluated with the aid of the software SuperPro Designer. B1 used a batch cell culture viral production step, with a viral titer of 5 × 1010 viral particles (VP)/mL in both stainless-steel and disposable equipment. P1 used a perfusion cell culture viral production step, with a viral titer of 1 × 1012 VP/mL in exclusively disposable equipment. Both processes were sized to produce 400 M/yr vaccine doses. P1 led to a smaller cost per dose than B1 ($0.15 vs. $0.23) and required a much smaller capital investment ($126 M vs. $299 M). The media and facility-dependent expenses were found to be the main contributors to the operating cost.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule
    Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule UNITED STATES for ages 19 years or older 2021 Recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices How to use the adult immunization schedule (www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip) and approved by the Centers for Disease Determine recommended Assess need for additional Review vaccine types, Control and Prevention (www.cdc.gov), American College of Physicians 1 vaccinations by age 2 recommended vaccinations 3 frequencies, and intervals (www.acponline.org), American Academy of Family Physicians (www.aafp. (Table 1) by medical condition and and considerations for org), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (www.acog.org), other indications (Table 2) special situations (Notes) American College of Nurse-Midwives (www.midwife.org), and American Academy of Physician Assistants (www.aapa.org). Vaccines in the Adult Immunization Schedule* Report y Vaccines Abbreviations Trade names Suspected cases of reportable vaccine-preventable diseases or outbreaks to the local or state health department Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine Hib ActHIB® y Clinically significant postvaccination reactions to the Vaccine Adverse Event Hiberix® Reporting System at www.vaers.hhs.gov or 800-822-7967 PedvaxHIB® Hepatitis A vaccine HepA Havrix® Injury claims Vaqta® All vaccines included in the adult immunization schedule except pneumococcal 23-valent polysaccharide (PPSV23) and zoster (RZV) vaccines are covered by the Hepatitis A and hepatitis B vaccine HepA-HepB Twinrix® Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Information on how to file a vaccine injury Hepatitis B vaccine HepB Engerix-B® claim is available at www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation. Recombivax HB® Heplisav-B® Questions or comments Contact www.cdc.gov/cdc-info or 800-CDC-INFO (800-232-4636), in English or Human papillomavirus vaccine HPV Gardasil 9® Spanish, 8 a.m.–8 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.2.3 Gardasil and Autoimmune Diseases
    HPV vaccination and autoimmune disease CONFIDENTIAL Medicines Adverse Reactions Committee Meeting date 10 September 2015 Agenda item 3.2.3 Title Gardasil and autoimmune diseases Medsafe For advice/ Submitted by Paper type Pharmacovigilance Team For information Active constituent Medicines Sponsors Human papillomavirus type 6 L1 protein, type 11 Gardasil Bio CSL for MSD L1 protein, type 16 L1 protein and type 18 L1 protein Funding Fully funded for girls aged under 18 years or patients aged under 25 years old with confirmed HIV infection or in transplant patients. Previous MARC Gardasil has only been discussed previously in relation to CARM case meetings reports. International action The EMA have announced an investigation into HPV vaccine and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS). This review will complete at the end of the year. Prescriber Update None Schedule Prescription medicine Usage data Over 200,000 girls and women have received at least one dose in NZ Worldwide cumulative exposure post-marketing, to the end of May 2015 was 63.6 million. Cumulative exposure in clinical trials was 29,932 Advice sought The Committee is asked to advise whether: − There is a safety concern relating to development of autoimmune conditions after HPV vaccination Medicines Adverse Reactions Committee: 10 September 2015 Page 1 of 46 HPV vaccination and autoimmune disease CONFIDENTIAL Table of Contents 1.0 PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 Vaccine-Associated Anaphylaxis and Allergic Reactions: Consensus Statements of the KAAACI Urticaria/Angioedema/Anaphylaxis Working Group
    Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2021 Jul;13(4):526-544 https://doi.org/10.4168/aair.2021.13.4.526 pISSN 2092-7355·eISSN 2092-7363 Review COVID-19 Vaccine-associated Anaphylaxis and Allergic Reactions: Consensus Statements of the KAAACI Urticaria/Angioedema/Anaphylaxis Working Group Mi-Ae Kim ,1† Yong Won Lee ,2† So Ri Kim ,3 Joo-Hee Kim ,4 Taek ki Min ,5 6 7 6 8 Received: May 10, 2021 Hae-Sim Park , Meeyong Shin , Young-Min Ye , Sooyoung Lee , 9 10,11 12* Accepted: Jun 2, 2021 Jeongmin Lee , Jeong-Hee Choi , Gwang Cheon Jang , Yoon-Seok Chang 13* Correspondence to Gwang Cheon Jang, MD, PhD 1Department of Pulmonology, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA Department of Pediatrics, National Health University, Seongnam, Korea Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, 100 Ilsan-ro, 2Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, International St. Mary's Ilsandong-gu, Goyang 10444, Korea. Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea 3 Tel: +82-31-900-0520 Division of Respiratory Medicine and Allergy, Department of Internal Medicine, Research Center for Fax: +82-31-900-0343 Pulmonary Disorders, Jeonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, Korea 4Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine Hallym University E-mail: [email protected] Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Korea 5 Yoon-Seok Chang, MD, PhD Department of Pediatrics, Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Soonchunhyang University
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Nanocarrier-Based Adjuvants for Vaccine Delivery
    pharmaceutics Review An Overview of Nanocarrier-Based Adjuvants for Vaccine Delivery Kailash C. Petkar 1,*,†, Suyash M. Patil 2,†, Sandip S. Chavhan 3 , Kan Kaneko 4, Krutika K. Sawant 3, Nitesh K. Kunda 2,* and Imran Y. Saleem 4,* 1 Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India, New Delhi 110016, India 2 Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, St. John’s University, Jamaica, NY 11439, USA; [email protected] 3 Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Kalabhavan, Vadodara 390001, India; [email protected] (S.S.C.); [email protected] (K.K.S.) 4 School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (K.C.P.); [email protected] (N.K.K.); [email protected] (I.Y.S.) † These authors contributed eqally to this work. Abstract: The development of vaccines is one of the most significant medical accomplishments which has helped to eradicate a large number of diseases. It has undergone an evolutionary process from live attenuated pathogen vaccine to killed whole organisms or inactivated toxins (toxoids), each of them having its own advantages and disadvantages. The crucial parameters in vaccination are the generation of memory response and protection against infection, while an important aspect is the effective delivery of antigen in an intelligent manner to evoke a robust immune response. In Citation: Petkar, K.C.; Patil, S.M.; Chavhan, S.S.; Kaneko, K.; Sawant, this regard, nanotechnology is greatly contributing to developing efficient vaccine adjuvants and K.K.; Kunda, N.K.; Saleem, I.Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Gsk Vaccines in 2010
    GSK VACCINES IN 2010 Thomas Breuer, MD, MSc Senior Vice President Head of Global Vaccines Development GSK Biologicals Vaccines business characteristics Few global players and high barriers to entry – Complex manufacturing – Large scale investment Long product life cycles – Complex intellectual property High probability of R&D success – 70% post-POC New technology/novel products Better pricing for newer vaccines – HPV vaccines (Cervarix, Gardasil) – Pneumococcal vaccines (Synflorix, Prevnar-13) Operating margin comparable to pharmaceutical products Heightened awareness New markets 2 Research & development timelines Identify Produce Pre-Clinical Proof of Registration/ Phase I Phase II Phase III File Antigens Antigens Testing Concept Post Marketing Research (inc. Immunology) Pre-Clinical Development (inc. Formulation Science) Clinical Development (inc. Post Marketing Surveillance) Transfer Process to Manufacturing Build Facility x x Up to $10-20M Up to $50-100M $500M - $1B x x x 1-10 yrs 2-3 yrs 2-4 yrs > 1 yr GSK vaccines business 2009 sales £3.7 billion (+30%) +19% CAGR excl. H1N1 Vaccines represent 13% since 2005 of total GSK sales Sale s (£m) 4000 3500 Recent approvals: 3000 US: Cervarix 2500 EU: Synflorix 2000 Pandemic: Pandemrix; Arepanrix 1500 1000 500 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Increased Emerging Market presence Growth rate is CER 5 GSK vaccines: fastest growing part of GSK in 2009 2009 Sales Share Growth (CER) Respiratory £ 6,977m 25% +5% Consumer £ 4,654m 16% +7% Anti-virals £ 4,150m 15% +12% Vaccines £ 3,706m 13% +30% CV & Urogenital
    [Show full text]
  • Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS)
    Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) Report on GACVS meeting June 2013 1 | GACVS June 2013 report Topics Discussed ! Pentavalent vaccine in 4 Asian Countries ! Zoster vaccine safety and varicella vaccine safety in immunocompromised populations ! Immunization during pregnancy ! Yellow fever vaccine safety during mass immunization campaigns in sub-Saharan Africa ! Safety profile: Japanese encephalitis vaccines ! Update: human papillomavirus vaccines ! Update: pandemic influenza vaccine (Pandemrix®) and narcolepsy 2 | GACVS June 2013 report Progressive pentavalent vaccine introduction in 4 Asian Countries ! Sri Lanka (Crucell, Jan 2008): – Within 3 months, 4 deaths and 24 suspected HHE: precautionary suspension of initial lot. – 1 death following immunization April 2009: vaccine suspended, DTwP and Hep B resumed. ! Bhutan (Panacea, Sep 2009) – 5 cases of encephalopathy and/or meningoencephalitis lead to suspended vaccination 23 Oct 2009. (Subsequently, 4 serious AEFI were identified and investigated). ! India (Serum Institute of India, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, Dec 2011; Goa, Pondicherry, Karnataka, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Gujarat and Delhi from Q3 2012 – Q1 2013) – To date, 83 AEFI cases reported, some associated with mortality. ! Vietnam (Crucell, Jun 2010 - May 2013) – 43 serious AEFI investigated, including 27 with fatal outcome. – Following 9 deaths following vaccination reported Dec 2012 - March 2013: vaccine suspended. 3 | GACVS June 2013 report GACVS analysis of common features among countries experiencing significant vaccine safety concerns ! Vaccination programmes are well established and achieves high coverage ! Vaccine introduction was accompanied by thorough training of health-care staff on benefits and risks of vaccine ! Sri Lanka and Bhutan: discontinuation and resumption of pentavalent vaccine did not significantly modify pattern of serious AEFI with previously utilized vaccines ! Limitations in all 4 countries: – Incomplete clinical information complicated causality assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • For the Use Only of a Registered Medical Practitioner Or a Hospital Or a Laboratory ENGERIX B Hepatitis B Vaccine
    For the use only of a Registered Medical Practitioner or a Hospital or a Laboratory ENGERIX® B Hepatitis B Vaccine (rDNA) IP (Genetically Engineered) 1. NAME OF THE MEDICINAL PRODUCT Hepatitis B Vaccine (rDNA) IP (Genetically Engineered) 2. QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE COMPOSITION ENGERIX B 20 mcg/1 ml (Adult) 1 dose (1 ml) contains : Equivalent to 20 mcg purified HBV surface antigen produced in Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Hydrated Aluminium Oxide IP equiv to 0.5 mg Aluminium ENGERIX B 10 mcg/0.5 ml (Paediatric) 1 dose (0.5 ml) contains: Equivalent to 10 mcg purified HBV surface antigen produced in Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Hydrated Aluminium Oxide IP equiv to 0.25 mg Aluminium For the full list of excipients, see section 6.1 List of excipients 3. PHARMACEUTICAL FORM Suspension for injection The suspension is turbid white. 4. CLINICAL PARTICULARS 4.1. Therapeutic indications ENGERIX B is indicated for active immunization against Hepatitis B Virus infection (HBV) caused by all known subtypes in subjects of all ages considered at risk of exposure to HBV. It can be expected that hepatitis D will also be prevented by immunization with ENGERIX B as hepatitis D (caused by the delta agent) does not occur in the absence of hepatitis B infection. Immunization against hepatitis B is expected in the long term to reduce not only the incidence of this disease but also its chronic complication such as chronic active hepatitis B and hepatitis B associated cirrhosis. In areas of low prevalence of hepatitis B, immunization is particularly recommended for those belonging to groups identified at increased risk of infection (see below), however, universal immunization of all infants and adolescents will contribute to the control of hepatitis B on a population basis.
    [Show full text]