More Science News

[joreth]

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/2171512/

And on the hopeful front for HPV, there is currently research being done on something called Listeria monocytogenes to deliver a tumor-specific antigen fusion protein. 

"Pre-clinically, bioengineered attenuated Listeria that secrete Advaxis' proprietary fusion protein have the ability to generate a robust immune response, break immune tolerance to cancer and produce an unusually strong and effective multi-level therapeutic immune response to existing cancer and other diseases. ... The Company's proprietary antigen fusion protein technology stimulates innate immunity: both arms of the adaptive cellular immune system, suppresses regulatory T-cells that inhibit many vaccines in the function of activated tumor-killing cells and has other anti-tumor effects."

What makes this so exciting is that this research is to develop a therapeutic vaccine (as opposed to prophylactic vaccines currently on the market) that would treat women who ALREADY HAVE cervical cancer as a result of HPV.  The limitation to the current Gardasil vaccine is that it doesn't do anything for women who have already been exposed to those strains of HPV.  Since older women are assumed to have more chance to be exposed, we are discouraged from getting the vaccine, if only because the FDA hasn't approved it so insurance won't cover it, making it cost-prohibitive to many of us.  The pap smear has been great for early detection of pre-cancerous cells once we already have HPV, and early detection is responsible for the high success rate in treating cancer and cervical dysplasia.

But for those statistically few women who do not respond to the treatment, or do not detect it early enough, this would be fantastic to be able to give them a shot that contains a vaccine that goes into the body and actively attacks the tumor cells as well as boosting the body's own ability to fight the cancer.

Yay science!

Comments

[joreth]

Yes, there is a slight benefit for women, but unfortunately not enough of one for the FDA to approve the vaccine for older women and not enough of one for many women to justify the cost of getting it out of pocket.

Personally, I think everyone should get it anyway since, although we all may have been exposed to HPV already, The chances that we have all been exposed to all 4 of the strains that Gardasil covers is pretty low, even if you *do* assume that there is no significant benefit for women who already have that strain.

[leora.livejournal.com]

*nods* If you can afford it, it definitely makes sense. The arguments I saw against were all financial (as I explained to my friend). And honestly, they're not necessarily wrong. If you're looking at the best value for your health care money and we assume we can't afford everything good, there may be more beneficial ways to spend the money to help people than vaccinating older women for HPV. There is a lot of health care people need and don't get.

But if you're looking at it from a personal point of view of I can either get this or not and you don't need to sacrifice food, rent, more important health care, etc. then you probably want to get it.

[joreth]

Yep, since I don't have any health insurance, I have to really pick and choose my healthcare options, which means that I haven't gotten the vaccine either, purely for financial reasons.

However, to go back to your original comment correcting me on the efficacy of the vaccine in older women and/or women who have already been exposed, an entry I made a while back quotes some figures suggesting that significant improvement in dealing with an existing HPV infection:

http://joreth.livejournal.com/131621.html