Innovations in HPV vaccination and their role in global cervical cancer control: a review

Abstract

Cervical cancer remains a primary cause of gynecologic oncology-related mortality globally, with a disproportionate burden in sub-Saharan Africa. The pathogenesis of the disease is fundamentally driven by persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes, most notably HPV-16 and HPV-18. The evolution of prophylactic HPV vaccination has transformed preventive oncology, progressing from first-generation bivalent and quadrivalent formulations to the nonavalent vaccine, which extended protection to five additional oncogenic types. These vaccines, composed of L1 virus-like particles (VLPs), induce robust and durable humoral and cellular immune responses, leading to population-level reductions of up to 98% in vaccine-type infections and 80% in high-grade cervical lesions. To address persistent global health disparities, regionally produced, cost-effective alternatives such as Cecolin and Cervavac have been introduced to enhance accessibility within low- and middle-income countries. This shift toward broader coverage is further supported by the 2022 WHO recommendation for a single-dose schedule, aimed at optimizing resource-limited immunization programs. Current research is now pivoting toward next-generation candidates targeting the conserved L2 protein for pan-genotype protection, as well as therapeutic vaccines targeting E6 and E7 oncoproteins to clear established infections. However, achieving the WHO’s 2030 cervical cancer elimination targets remains contingent upon overcoming infrastructural, cultural, and informational barriers that hinder vaccine uptake. This review synthesizes the molecular composition and immunological mechanisms of current and emerging HPV vaccines, evaluating their clinical efficacy and the systemic strategies required to ensure equitable global access.

Plain language summary

How next-generation HPV vaccines can help eliminate cervical cancer

Cervical cancer, primarily caused by persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) genotypes, remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among women, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This review provides an overview of the mechanisms, clinical efficacy, and established safety profiles of currently available recombinant HPV vaccines. It highlights important developments in the field, including the shift toward simplified single-dose schedules, the emergence of more affordable vaccines produced in emerging markets, and the validation of heterologous mix-and-match strategies to address supply-chain limitations. The review also examines the future direction of HPV immunization, including next-generation vaccine candidates with broader cross-protective potential and therapeutic vaccines designed to target existing HPV-related disease. Taken together, these developments may contribute substantially to improving global vaccine access and coverage, thereby supporting ongoing efforts to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health threat in line with the World Health Organization strategy.

Keywords

cervical cancer elimination human papillomavirus immunogenicity oncoproteins therapeutic vaccines virus-like particles

Introduction

Cervical cancer remains a significant global health challenge, primarily driven by persistent infection with oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes. Among these, HPV-16 and HPV-18 are the most prevalent, accounting for approximately 70% of cases worldwide.^1,2 The viral life cycle begins with the infection of basal epithelial cells, a process mediated by the major capsid protein L1, which binds to host heparan sulfate proteoglycans, and the minor capsid protein L2, which facilitates viral entry and endosomal escape for genome delivery.³ The transition from infection to cervical carcinogenesis is predicated on the failure of the host to clear high-risk HPV (HR-HPV). While most infections are transient and resolve spontaneously within 6–24 months, sustained persistence leads to the continuous expression of the E6 and E7 oncoproteins.^3,4 These viral proteins orchestrate malignant transformation by inactivating the tumor suppressors p53 and retinoblastoma protein (pRb), respectively, thereby inducing genomic instability and relentless cellular proliferation.⁵ Evidence from longitudinal studies underscores that women with type-specific HR-HPV persistence face a substantially higher risk of developing high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2/3) compared to those who achieve viral clearance.^6,7 This clinical progression is fundamentally driven by the host immune system, which serves as the primary determinant of infection outcome.

A robust cell-mediated response, driven by cytotoxic CD8⁺ T cells and Th1 cytokines such as interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) and interleukin-2 (IL-2), is essential for viral eradication.^4,8 Nevertheless, HR-HPV has evolved sophisticated evasion strategies; for instance, the E5 and E7 oncoproteins downregulate major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I expression, thereby impairing antigen presentation.⁹ Furthermore, the cervical microenvironment in persistent cases is often characterized by an influx of regulatory T cells (Tregs) and elevated levels of immunosuppressive cytokines (IL-10 and TGF-β), which facilitate a chronic infection state.^10,11 Recent studies also highlight the importance of tissue-resident memory T (TRM) cells in local surveillance, noting that deficient TRM responses are strongly associated with viral persistence.^12,13 Beyond immunological factors, epigenetic and microenvironmental variables influence disease progression. Hypermethylation of viral and host genes such as PAX1 and ZNF582 has emerged as a potential biomarker for identifying transforming infections, especially when integrated with p16/Ki-67 immunoscores.¹⁴ Additionally, the cervicovaginal microbiota plays a modulatory role, where a depletion of Lactobacillus crispatus and increased microbial diversity are linked to higher lesion grades.¹⁵ Despite the promise of these biomarkers in risk stratification and post-treatment surveillance, their clinical utility is currently limited by geographical heterogeneity and a lack of standardized testing methods. Given the complexities of managing persistent infection and the associated risk factors, such as immunosuppression, age, and smoking, primary prevention through vaccination remains the most effective public health strategy.

The landscape of HPV prevention has evolved from first-generation bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines to the current nonavalent formulations, which have significantly reduced the global burden of disease. More recently, the introduction of regionally developed, cost-effective vaccines such as Cecolin, WalrinVax, and Cervavac has addressed barriers to accessibility in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).¹⁶ Understanding the clinical success of these interventions requires a detailed examination of their molecular architecture and the immunological pathways they activate.

Composition and mechanism of action

The structural foundation of prophylactic HPV vaccines is the L1-derived virus-like particle (VLP). These recombinant particles are synthesized to be non-infectious, as they lack the viral genome, yet they maintain the highly organized, icosahedral symmetry of the native virion.¹⁷ This structural fidelity is critical for efficient immune recognition and high immunogenicity. Specific composition and manufacturing of these vaccines vary significantly based on their valency, the host expression system utilized for protein synthesis, and the proprietary adjuvant systems employed to enhance long-term immunological memory. The selection of a biological expression system represents a primary technical differentiator among these vaccines, directly influencing both the complexity of protein folding and the scalability of production. While the established Gardasil series utilizes Saccharomyces cerevisiae, more recently developed vaccines such as Cervavac and WalrinVax leverage alternative yeast strains to optimize antigen yield and thermal stability.^18,19 In contrast, Cervarix is distinct in its utilization of a baculovirus expression system within insect cells; a platform that facilitates complex post-translational modifications, such as glycosylation patterns that more closely resemble human proteins.²⁰ To address the imperatives of global affordability and supply, Cecolin employs an E. coli bacterial system. Although this necessitates in vitro protein refolding, it offers a highly cost-effective manufacturing pathway for LMICs.¹⁶

The adjuvant component is also critical for modulating the magnitude and duration of the vaccine-induced IgG response. While most formulations rely on traditional aluminum-based salts, Cervarix incorporates the AS04 adjuvant system. This specialized system combines aluminum hydroxide with 3-O-desacyl-4’-monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL), a Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) agonist which promotes higher and more sustained antibody titers compared to conventional aluminum salts alone (Table 1).²¹

Table 1.

Comparative composition of global HPV vaccines.

Vaccine	Valency	Expression system	Adjuvant system
Cervarix	HPV-16, 18	Insect cells (Trichoplusia ni)	AS04 (aluminum + MPL)
Gardasil	HPV-6, 11, 16, 18	Yeast (S. cerevisiae)	AAHS (amorphous aluminum)
Gardasil 9	HPV-6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, 58	Yeast (S. cerevisiae)	AAHS (amorphous aluminum)
Cecolin	HPV-16, 18	Bacteria (E. coli)	Aluminum hydroxide
WalrinVax	HPV-16, 18	Yeast (Pichia pastoris)	Aluminum phosphate
Cervavac	HPV-6, 11, 16, 18	Yeast (Hansenula polymorpha)	Aluminum salts

HPV, human papillomavirus.

Mechanism of action of HPV vaccines

Upon intramuscular administration, these VLPs function as potent antigens that are rapidly sequestered by professional antigen-presenting cells (APCs).²² The APCs process the VLPs and migrate to regional lymphoid tissues to present L1 epitopes to naive CD4⁺ T helper cells. This interaction facilitates the formation of germinal centers, driving B-cell activation, class switching, and affinity maturation. The resulting immunological output is characterized by high-titer, high-affinity neutralizing antibodies specifically targeting the conformational epitopes of the L1 capsid.^23,24 These vaccine-induced anti-L1 antibodies circulate systemically and transudate through the capillary walls into the cervicovaginal mucosa. Here, they provide a first line of defense by binding to incoming virions, effectively neutralizing the virus before it can attach to or enter the basal epithelial cells.²⁴ By arresting the viral life cycle at this nascent stage, the vaccines prevent the establishment of the persistent infection that is necessary for cervical oncogenesis. Consequently, serum neutralizing antibody titers serve as the primary immunological correlate of protection against de novo HPV infection.²⁵

While the humoral response is paramount, HPV vaccines also elicit supportive cellular immunity that ensures durable protection. CD4⁺ T cells are instrumental in orchestrating long-term immunological memory through the generation of memory B cells, which provide a rapid and robust recall response upon viral re-exposure.²⁶ It is important to note, however, that while standard L1-VLP vaccines induce modest CD8⁺ T-cell responses, these are insufficient for the clearance of established, intracellular infections.²⁷ This mechanistic limitation necessitates a different approach for patients with existing disease. Emerging therapeutic HPV vaccine strategies are specifically engineered to bypass the L1-mediated antibody pathway. They aim to stimulate potent cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) responses directed against the viral oncoproteins E6 and E7. By targeting these early-phase proteins expressed in infected and malignant cells, therapeutic candidates seek to achieve the clearance of established lesions and advanced HPV-associated malignancies.^28,29 Figure 1 shows the development of anti-L1 antibodies and long-lasting immunological memory against HPV.

Figure 1.

Immune response to HPV: anti-L1 antibody production and memory cell formation over time.

Following intramuscular injection, HPV L1 VLPs are taken up by antigen-presenting cells. The VLPs are then processed and presented through MHC class II, which activates CD4+ T helper cells. This T-cell activation stimulates B cells to differentiate into plasma cells that produce neutralizing antibodies. These antibodies prevent HPV from infecting epithelial cells while memory B and T cells form, providing long-term immunity. Image was generated using the Seedream tool, version 4.5 (ByteDance Ltd., China).

Efficacy and longevity

The clinical utility of HPV vaccines is evidenced by consistent data from global randomized controlled trials and longitudinal population-based studies. These findings demonstrate that licensed formulations provide high, albeit variable, protection against persistent infection and the subsequent development of high-grade precancerous lesions. The nonavalent vaccine—Gardasil 9, currently offers the broadest spectrum of protection, achieving approximately 97% efficacy against CIN2+ associated with five additional high-risk genotypes (HPV-31, 33, 45, 52, and 58) while maintaining the robust protection against the original four types (HPV-6, 11, 16, 18) established by earlier formulations.^30–32 The predecessor quadrivalent vaccine—Gardasil, has shown up to 98% efficacy against cervical lesions linked to HPV-16 and -18, as well as nearly 100% protection against genital warts caused by types 6 and 11.^33,34 Similarly, the bivalent vaccine—Cervarix, demonstrates over 90% efficacy against persistent HPV-16 and 18 infections and associated CIN2+; notably, it also provides significant partial cross-protection against non-vaccine types HPV-31 and HPV-45.^35,36

A defining hallmark of these L1-VLP vaccines is the remarkable durability of the immune response. Neutralizing antibody titers remain well above protective thresholds for at least 10–14 years post-vaccination, and ongoing immunogenicity studies suggest that the induction of long-lasting immune memory may negate the need for booster doses in immunocompetent populations.^34,37 Accumulating evidence further corroborates these clinical findings. For instance, CDC analyses have reported an 80% reduction in precancerous lesions among women aged 20–24 years, the cohort with the highest early vaccine uptake.^38,39 Parallel to these established platforms, evaluations of newer, regionally developed vaccines indicate comparable clinical performance. Cecolin has demonstrated nearly 100% efficacy against persistent HPV-16 and 18 infections during a 5-year follow-up, characterized by robust seroconversion and sustained antibody levels.^40,41 Furthermore, WalrinVax and Cervavac have exhibited immunogenicity non-inferior to WHO-prequalified vaccines, with Cervavac producing antibody responses similar to those of the quadrivalent Gardasil.^19,42

While long-term data for these emerging vaccines beyond 5 years is still accumulating, current evidence suggests that their ability to induce durable protection and immunological memory is consistent with established VLP technology. As these vaccines expand global coverage, the focus shifts from clinical efficacy to ensuring their safety profiles are rigorously monitored to maintain public confidence (Table 2).

Table 2.

Clinical trials status of the global HPV vaccines.

Vaccine	Sample enrolled	Study phase	Completion status	Clinical trial ID
Cervarix	18,729	Phase III	Completed 2009-11-26	NCT00122681
Cervarix	1046	Phase II	Completed 2009-02-10	NCT00316693
Gardasil	216	Phase III	Completed 2014-03	NCT00813319
WalrinVax	900	Phase II	Completed 2019-07	NCT02740777
Cecolin	1025	Phase III	Completed 2023-12-14	NCT04508309
Cecolin	480	Phase IV	Unknown	NCT05415345
Cervarix	5000	Phase IV	Expected completion 2026-05-31	NCT05237947
Zerun HPV-9	1200	Phase III	Unknown	NCT05580341
Cecolin	200	Phase IV	Completed 2024-01-17	NCT06345885
Gardasil-9	120	Phase II	Expected completion 2028-01	NCT06624839
Cervavac	450	Phase III	Expected completion 2026-12	NCT06281119

HPV, human papillomavirus.

Safety and side effects

The clinical implementation of HPV vaccination is supported by an exemplary safety record, established through rigorous clinical trials and reinforced by decades of global post-marketing surveillance. Data consistently demonstrate that all licensed formulations possess high safety margins, with the majority of adverse events (AEs) classified as mild and self-limiting. The most frequently reported AEs across all platforms are localized injection-site reactions, including pain, erythema, and edema. Systemic effects, such as headache, fatigue, nausea, and low-grade pyrexia, occur less frequently and typically resolve spontaneously without medical intervention.^43,44 Notably, the reactogenicity profile varies slightly by formulation; for instance, the AS04 adjuvant system used in Cervarix is associated with a marginal increase in local reactogenicity compared to traditional aluminum-only salts, though this carries no significant clinical concern.⁴⁵ Similarly, Gardasil 9 may elicit slightly higher rates of local reactions than its quadrivalent predecessor due to higher antigen and adjuvant concentrations, yet its overall safety profile remains comparable.^46,47 Serious adverse events (SAEs), such as anaphylaxis, are exceedingly rare, and extensive epidemiological studies have failed to establish a causal link between HPV vaccination and autoimmune, neurological, or reproductive disorders. This safety consensus is shared by global health authorities, including the WHO and the CDC, whose continuous monitoring affirms that the benefits of preventing HPV-related malignancies far outweigh the risks of transient side effects.^48,49

The safety profiles of newer, regionally developed vaccines, including Cecolin, WalrinVax, and Cervavac, mirror those of established WHO-prequalified formulations. Cecolin has demonstrated a tolerability profile comparable to both Gardasil and Cervarix, with injection-site reactions remaining the most common event, while systemic myalgia and fatigue remain infrequent.^16,40,50 WalrinVax and Cervavac have also exhibited minimal reactogenicity in Phase III evaluations, with no reported vaccine-related SAEs to date.^51,52 This foundation of clinical safety is essential for sustaining the public trust required for broad population coverage. However, translating these safe and effective clinical tools into a successful public health outcome requires overcoming significant logistical, economic, and sociocultural barriers, particularly in high-burden regions.

Acceptability and coverage

While international guidelines prioritize HPV vaccination for females aged 9–14 years, with catch-up protocols extending to age 26 and gender-neutral strategies enhancing herd immunity, global uptake remains deeply stratified.^31,53–55 In high-income regions, including North America, Europe, and Australia, integrated health systems have achieved coverage rates of 80%–90%.^56–58 Conversely, uptake in LMICs, particularly within sub-Saharan Africa, remains constrained. Although nations like Rwanda and Tanzania have exceeded 70% first-dose coverage, the regional average stagnates near 50%, with several countries reporting rates below 20%.^59–61 Figure 2 shows HPV vaccine coverage across various WHO regions.

Figure 2.

HPV vaccine coverage (first and last dose) among females across WHO regions, 2018–2023.

Logistical and manufacturing constraints

The mass production of L1-VLP vaccines is a sophisticated bioprocess requiring Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)-certified facilities, precise fermentation technologies, and rigorous downstream purification to maintain particle stability.^62,63 The scarcity of such specialized infrastructure in LMICs, compounded by the logistical demands of maintaining a continuous cold chain in remote settings, contributes significantly to global supply disparities. The emergence of regionally produced, cost-effective alternatives such as Cecolin and Cervavac is pivotal in addressing these vulnerabilities. Cervavac’s integration into India’s national immunization program serves as a critical model for improving sustainable access in high-burden, resource-limited environments.^64,65

Economic and sociocultural barriers

Human papillomavirus vaccination is highly cost-effective. Evidence consistently demonstrates that even with variable delivery costs, immunization programs yield substantial public health returns by averting cervical cancer mortality, achieving a highly favorable cost-per-disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted.^66,67 Despite this economic value, implementation in sub-Saharan Africa is hindered by weak health infrastructure, limited political commitment, and cultural stigma. Studies in Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, and Ghana highlight that inadequate HPV literacy among stakeholders and historical distrust in immunization programs, exacerbated by COVID-19 pandemic disruptions, remain significant impediments to demand creation.^68–70

Strategic policy evolutions

The 2022 WHO endorsement of a single-dose schedule for individuals aged 9–20 years represents a landmark shift in global health policy, specifically designed to circumvent persistent systemic hurdles. This transition is anchored by robust clinical evidence from the KEN SHE, DoRIS, and ESCUDDO trials, which collectively demonstrate that a solitary dose elicits a durable immune response and protection against persistent high-risk HPV (HR-HPV) infection comparable to traditional multi-dose regimens.^71–73 As of late 2024, over 57 countries have adopted this simplified protocol, resulting in measurable reductions in logistical complexity and national program expenditures. Parallel to dose reduction, the programmatic landscape has been further bolstered by the validation of heterologous schedules. These mix-and-match approaches have proven safe and immunogenic, offering a pragmatic safety net for maintaining coverage during unforeseen supply-chain interruptions or brand-specific stock-outs.^66,74 Ultimately, the success of these strategic shifts is contingent upon the implementation of targeted outreach and delivery innovations, which are essential to bridging the gap between vaccine availability and community acceptance.

Strategies to improve HPV vaccination coverage in LMICs

Achieving equitable vaccine coverage in low-income countries (LICs) necessitates a transition from generic immunization models to context-specific, innovative delivery strategies. While school-based programs remain a cornerstone of adolescent immunization, they often fail to reach the most vulnerable, out-of-school populations. Consequently, recent policy shifts have focused on diversifying delivery channels and optimizing healthcare resources to ensure sustainable, high-volume uptake.⁶⁶

Integration and hybrid delivery models

A primary catalyst for improving coverage is the adoption of the single-dose HPV vaccination schedule. By reducing the number of required clinical encounters, this approach minimizes logistical hurdles and lowers the opportunity costs for families, particularly in regions where compliance with multi-dose regimens is historically low.⁷⁵ To maximize the impact of the simplified schedule, hybrid delivery models are being deployed. These models combine school-based outreach with community-centric initiatives, such as mobile clinics, faith-based health days, and door-to-door campaigns. Integrating HPV immunization with other essential adolescent services, including deworming, menstrual hygiene management, and nutritional screening, has proven effective in normalizing the vaccine and streamlining resource utilization.^67,76,77

Community empowerment and digital innovation

Strengthening last-mile delivery relies heavily on the empowerment of community health workers (CHWs). As trusted local intermediaries, CHWs are uniquely positioned to address vaccine hesitancy, counter misinformation, and mobilize caregivers. Training programs that focus on task-shifting enable CHWs to lead education efforts and facilitate follow-up for missed doses, thereby enhancing the resilience of local health systems. This human-centric approach is increasingly augmented by digital innovations. Electronic immunization registries (EIRs) and mobile health applications are being utilized to improve data quality and provide individualized tracking. Text-message reminders and digital scheduling tools have demonstrated significant success in reducing dropout rates and ensuring that catch-up campaigns reach the intended cohorts.^76,77

Demand creation and economic sustainability

Sustainable coverage is also dependent on culturally sensitive communication strategies. Engaging religious and community leaders, alongside organizing parent-teacher forums, is essential for building public trust and countering the cultural stigma often associated with HPV. In some contexts, ethically designed incentive-based approaches, such as the provision of school supplies or health vouchers, have served as effective catalysts for participation in underserved areas.^78,79 Finally, long-term viability in LICs is anchored in efficient cost management. Strategies such as pooled vaccine procurement through international alliances, task optimization within health workforces, and the integration of vaccination costs into national health insurance frameworks are vital for financial sustainability.^61,80 By combining these operational advancements with ongoing equity monitoring, implementation programs can move beyond clinical efficacy toward the actualization of a cervical-cancer-free future.

Next-generation HPV vaccine candidates

As the global health community moves toward elimination targets, research is pivoting to address the limitations of current L1-VLP technology. While highly effective, existing vaccines are genotype-specific and primarily prophylactic. Next-generation candidates are being engineered to provide pan-genotype protection and to serve as therapeutic interventions for established infections. The minor capsid protein, L2, has emerged as a primary target for universal HPV vaccines.⁸¹ Unlike the L1 protein, which varies across genotypes, the N-terminal sequence of L2 contains highly conserved epitopes. Preclinical and early clinical evaluations indicate that multimeric L2 constructs and mRNA-based L2 vaccines can induce cross-neutralizing antibodies against a diverse array of oncogenic types.^82,83 In addition to these L2-based strategies, high-valency L1-based formulations are also expanding coverage. A notable candidate is SCT1000, a recombinant 14-valent VLP vaccine that covers five additional HR-HPV types (HPV-35, 39, 51, 56, 59) beyond those included in Gardasil 9. Currently in Phase III evaluation, SCT1000’s immunogenicity is being rigorously assessed using pseudovirion-based neutralization assays and Luminex total IgG immunoassays to confirm broad-spectrum efficacy (NCT06041061).⁸⁴ Complementing these efforts, the RG2-VLP vaccine utilizes a dual-component strategy to target both α-HPV and β-HPV types by incorporating L2 protective epitopes.⁸⁵ Collectively, these advanced approaches are vital for regions where diverse HR-HPV genotypes predominate, offering a more comprehensive solution than traditional VLP formulations.

Therapeutic vaccines and immunotherapy

In contrast to prophylactic formulations, therapeutic vaccines are designed to stimulate cellular immunity against infected or transformed cells by targeting the viral oncoproteins E6 and E7. DNA vaccines, such as VGX-3100, have already demonstrated clinical efficacy in reducing CIN 2/3 lesions and clearing persistent HPV-16 and 18 infections.⁸⁶ Current research is exploring a variety of innovative platforms.

Peptide and liposomal vaccines

Synthetic long peptide vaccines like ISA101b have shown promise in Phase II trials, particularly when paired with anti-PD-1 therapies.⁸⁷ Similarly, the liposomal vaccine PDS0101 utilizes the Versamune platform to induce potent CD8⁺ T-cell responses.⁸⁸

Vector-based platforms

Viral and live-attenuated bacterial vectors, such as ADXS11-001, are being evaluated for their ability to promote tumor regression through enhanced antigen presentation.^89,90

Synergistic combinations

A major breakthrough in therapeutic oncology is the combination of vaccines with immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as PD-1 blockade, which produces synergistic antitumor effects by revitalizing exhausted T cells within the tumor microenvironment.^91,92 Furthermore, the early genes E1 and E2 have emerged as viable targets due to their high sequence conservation and ability to limit viral persistence. Multigene vaccine constructs incorporating E1, E2, E6, and E7 have demonstrated superior immunogenicity and tumor suppression in preclinical models, representing the next frontier in curative HPV interventions (Table 3).^93–95

Table 3.

Therapeutic HPV vaccine candidates targeting HPV-associated disease.

Vaccine candidate	Platform	Target antigens	Development status	Clinical trial ID
VGX-3100	DNA vaccine (electroporation-assisted)	E6, E7 (HPV 16/18)	Phase III	NCT03185013; NCT01304524
ISA101b	Synthetic long peptide vaccine	E6, E7 (HPV 16)	Phase II	NCT03669718; NCT02128126
PDS0101	Liposomal peptide (R-DOTAP)	E6, E7 (HPV 16)	Phase II	NCT02065973; NCT04260126
ADXS11-001 (Axalimogene filolisbac)	Live-attenuated Listeria monocytogenes	E7 (HPV 16)	Phase II/III	NCT02002182; NCT02653604
Tipapkinogene sovacivec (TG4001)	Recombinant vaccinia viral vector	E6, E7 (HPV 16/18)	Phase II	NCT03260023
GX-188E	DNA vaccine	E6, E7 (HPV 16/18)	Phase II	NCT02139267
MEDI0457 (INO-3112)	DNA vaccine + IL-12 plasmid	E6, E7 (HPV 16/18)	Phase I/II	NCT02172911
HB-201/HB-202	Arenavirus-based viral vector	E6, E7 (HPV 16)	Phase I/II	NCT04180215
PepCan	Peptide vaccine with immune adjuvant	E6 (HPV 16)	Phase II	NCT02481414

HPV, human papillomavirus.

Role of HPV vaccines in cervical cancer control

The implementation of HPV vaccination represents a pivotal advancement in preventive oncology. By targeting high-risk genotypes, specifically HPV-16 and HPV-18, widespread immunization, ideally administered prior to sexual debut, fosters robust herd immunity.⁹⁶ This has led to demonstrable, long-term reductions in HPV prevalence, the incidence of genital warts, and the burden of CIN.^96,97 Nations that have successfully integrated high-coverage vaccination with systematic screening, such as Australia and the United Kingdom, have recorded precipitous declines in cervical cancer rates, with current trajectories approaching the WHO elimination threshold of fewer than 4 cases per 100,000 women.^98,99 The maturation of regional vaccine production, exemplified by Cecolin and Cervavac, has been instrumental in extending these benefits to LMICs where the disease burden is disproportionately high. Ongoing surveillance continues to affirm the sustained global impact of these formulations in reducing the incidence of HPV-related malignancies.¹⁰⁰

The emerging therapeutic landscape

While a licensed therapeutic HPV vaccine remains pending, the clinical pipeline is robust, with over 20 candidates currently in development.^23,101 Meta-analyses of Phase II/III trials involving these candidates have reported promising clinical activity, with mean regression and clearance rates for CIN 2/3 lesions reaching 62.5% and 48.6%, respectively.^102,103 Innovative platforms are demonstrating significant potential in early-phase trials.

Viral vector and oral platforms

The oral vaccine IGMKK16E7 and the viral vector-based Tipapkinogen Sovacivec have shown favorable safety and immunogenicity in patients with high-grade lesions.^104,105

Immunotherapy synergies

Early findings for Vvax001 in HPV-16-positive CIN three patients highlight the feasibility of inducing targeted clinical benefits.¹⁰⁶ Evidence suggests that therapeutic vaccines can overcome local immunosuppression within the tumor microenvironment when combined with adjuvants or immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies.^92,106

Future perspectives in curative strategies

The next decade of cervical cancer control will likely be defined by multi-modal integration. Combining vaccines with conventional radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or checkpoint blockade may synergistically enhance antitumor immunity and prevent disease recurrence. Furthermore, the application of CRISPR/Cas9 genome-editing tools to specifically target and disrupt E6/E7 loci has demonstrated potent tumor suppression in preclinical models, representing a potential curative molecular intervention.^107,108 Strategies to augment immunogenicity through the use of nanoparticles, novel adjuvants, and co-stimulatory signals are also under active investigation. By aligning these biotechnological milestones with the WHO’s 2030 elimination targets, the global healthcare community is positioned to transition from disease management to the definitive eradication of cervical cancer as a public health threat.

Discussion

The transition to a single-dose HPV vaccination schedule represents a pivotal evolution in immunologic strategy, moving away from rigid multi-dose frameworks toward high-impact, evidence-based flexibility. As demonstrated by the KEN SHE, DoRIS, and ESCUDDO trials, the comparable efficacy of a single dose against persistent HR-HPV infection provides a robust scientific mandate for the WHO’s updated guidelines.^71,109 This shift is not merely a clinical convenience but a structural necessity; the adoption of simplified protocols by over 54 countries, including expanded national rollouts across sub-Saharan Africa, underscores a global appetite for interventions that minimize logistical friction and optimize resource allocation in resource-constrained settings.

Innovations in next-generation vaccines are further addressing the limitations of current L1-based VLPs. While L1 VLPs are highly immunogenic, they provide largely type-specific protection, necessitating complex multivalent formulations to cover diverse oncogenic strains. Emerging candidates targeting the minor capsid protein (L2) utilize highly conserved N-terminal epitopes to induce broad-spectrum, cross-neutralizing antibodies. Although L2 antigens are naturally less immunogenic than L1 VLPs, new delivery platforms, such as bacteriophage VLPs and mRNA-based L2 scaffolds, are overcoming this by presenting these conserved epitopes in highly repetitive, immune-engaging arrays. These advancements suggest a future where a single, low-cost vaccine could provide near-universal protection against both mucosal and cutaneous HPV types.

Furthermore, the integration of heterologous schedules and thermostable formulations, such as those utilizing controlled temperature chain (CTC) strategies, bolsters supply-chain resilience.¹¹⁰ By establishing that mixed-vaccine regimens are safe and immunogenic, public health systems can mitigate the risks of manufacturing shortages and delivery interruptions. Ultimately, the success of these strategic shifts is contingent upon bridging the last-mile gap through targeted community outreach and school-based programs. These strategies address the sociocultural determinants of vaccine hesitancy, ensuring that the theoretical benefits of simplified dosing and broader valency translate into sustained, equitable vaccine coverage and the global elimination of cervical cancer.

Limitations

This review is subject to several limitations inherent to its narrative design. Unlike a systematic review, the qualitative synthesis of literature may be susceptible to selection bias, focusing primarily on high-impact, English-language trials. Methodologically, the absence of a quantitative meta-analysis precludes a statistical comparison of effect sizes across the diverse global cohorts studied. Clinically, while the evidence supporting single-dose efficacy and heterologous schedules is robust, long-term longitudinal data exceeding 15 years are still required to confirm the duration of protection relative to multi-dose benchmarks. Furthermore, data remains sparse regarding the immunogenicity of simplified protocols in immunocompromised populations, particularly those living with HIV. Finally, the long latency between HPV infection and malignancy means the definitive impact of these recent policy shifts on cervical cancer mortality will not be fully measurable for several decades.

Conclusion

The HPV vaccination landscape is shifting toward evidence-based programmatic flexibility, supported by the validation of single-dose efficacy and heterologous schedules. These advancements, alongside the clinical maturation of L2-based and mRNA platforms, provide a transformative toolkit to overcome historical barriers to vaccine equity. However, realizing the full potential of these innovations requires bridging delivery gaps through localized and school-based interventions. Future research should prioritize long-term effectiveness of emerging vaccine platforms, durability of single-dose protection across diverse populations, and implementation strategies that improve uptake in low-resource settings. By aligning technical breakthroughs with sustained political commitment and context-specific evidence, the global community can achieve the WHO 2030 targets and eventually eradicate cervical cancer as a public health threat.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

None.

Declarations

ORCID iD

Agapiti H. Chuwa

References

Wei

Georges

Man

, et al. Causal attribution of human papillomavirus genotypes to invasive cervical cancer worldwide: a systematic analysis of the global literature. Lancet 2024; 404: 435–444.

Sadeghi

Aboofazeli

Sarrafzadeh

, et al. Investigating the link between HPV genotypes and cervical abnormality incidence in women with HPV infections: insights from a leading referral centre. Virol J 2025; 22: 264.

Graham Sheila

. The human papillomavirus replication cycle, and its links to cancer progression: a comprehensive review. Clin Sci 2017; 131: 2201–2221.

Stanley

MA.

Epithelial cell responses to infection with human papillomavirus. Clin Microbiol Rev 2012; 25: 215–222.

de Sanjosé

Brotons

Pavón

. The natural history of human papillomavirus infection. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2018; 47: 2–13.

Muñoz

Hernandez-Suarez

Méndez

, et al. Persistence of HPV infection and risk of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in a cohort of Colombian women. Br J Cancer 2009; 100: 1184–1190.

Zhou

Chen

, et al. Cervical conization and high risk–HPV status changes in relation to menopause: a retrospective longitudinal study based on generalized additive mixed models. BMC Infect Dis 2025; 25: 1322.

Moynihan

Kumar

Sultan

, et al. IL2 Targeted to CD8+ T cells promotes robust effector T-cell responses and potent antitumor immunity. Cancer Discov 2024; 14: 1206–1225.

Muntinga

CLP

de Vos van Steenwijk

Bekkers

RLM

, et al. Importance of the immune microenvironment in the spontaneous regression of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions (cSIL) and implications for immunotherapy. J Clin Med 2022; 11: 1432.

10.

Zhang

Liu

, et al. Targeting immune microenvironment in cervical cancer: current research and advances. J Transl Med 2025; 23: 888.

11.

, et al. Immunocytes in the tumor microenvironment: recent updates and interconnections. Front Immunol 2025; 16: 1517959.

12.

Cakir

Kayhan

Yilmaz

, et al. Emerging therapeutic strategies for HPV-related cancers: from gene editing to precision oncology. Curr Issues Mol Biol 2025; 47: 759.

13.

Shibata

Shah

Evans

, et al. Expansion of human papillomavirus-specific T cells in periphery and cervix in a therapeutic vaccine recipient whose cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion regressed. Front Immunol 2021; 12: 645299.

14.

Luo

Lian

Tao

, et al. Relationship between p16/ki67 immunoscores and PAX1/ZNF582 methylation status in precancerous and cancerous cervical lesions in high-risk HPV-positive women. BMC Cancer 2024; 24: 1171.

15.

Shen

Sun

Chu

, et al. Cervicovaginal microbiota: a promising direction for prevention and treatment in cervical cancer. Infect Agents Cancer 2024; 19: 13.

16.

Xie

, et al. Head-to-head immunogenicity comparison of one-dose Cecolin and Gardasil in Chinese girls aged 9–14 years: a randomized and open-label clinical trial. Vaccine 2025; 55: 127015.

17.

Oliveira

Sakauchi

Sasaki

ÉAK

, et al. Recombinant chimeric virus-like particles of human papillomavirus produced by distinct cell lineages: potential as prophylactic nanovaccine and therapeutic drug nanocarriers. Viruses 2025; 17: 1209.

18.

Petrosky

Bocchini

Jr Hariri

, et al. Use of 9-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine: updated HPV vaccination recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2015; 64: 300–304.

19.

Shi

, et al. Comparison of the safety and persistence of immunogenicity of bivalent HPV16/18 vaccine in healthy 9–14-year-old and 18–26-year-old Chinese females: a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. Vaccine 2023; 41: 7212–7219.

20.

Hong

Xue

, et al. Genetic engineering of baculovirus-insect cell system to improve protein production. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022; 10: 994743.

21.

Didierlaurent

Morel

Lockman

, et al. AS04, an aluminum salt- and TLR4 agonist-based adjuvant system, induces a transient localized innate immune response leading to enhanced adaptive immunity1. J Immunol 2009; 183: 6186–6197.

22.

Donaldson

Lateef

Walker

, et al. Virus-like particle vaccines: immunology and formulation for clinical translation. Expert Rev Vaccines 2018; 17: 833–849.

23.

Zheng

Mao

, et al. Advancing the fight against cervical cancer: the promise of therapeutic HPV vaccines. Vaccines 2025; 13: 92.

24.

Torgbor

Sohn

Dizon

BLP

, et al. In the activation of HPV-specific human B cells HPV-VLP vaccines mimic membrane-associated antigens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2025; 122: e2414514122.

25.

Kiamba

Goodier

Clarke

Immune responses to human papillomavirus infection and vaccination. Front Immunol 2025; 16: 1591297.

26.

Carter

Smith

Scherer

, et al. Term immune memory responses to human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination following 2 versus 3 doses of HPV vaccine. Vaccine 2025; 50: 126817.

27.

Roden

RBS

Stern

. Opportunities and challenges for human papillomavirus vaccination in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2018; 18: 240–254.

28.

Akhatova

Chan

Azizan

, et al. The efficacy of therapeutic DNA vaccines expressing the human papillomavirus E6 and E7 oncoproteins for treatment of cervical cancer: systematic review. Vaccines 2022; 10: 53.

29.

Sher

Lee

Liu

, et al. A therapeutic vaccine targeting HPV E6/E7 with intrinsic toll-like receptor 2 agonist activity induces antitumor immunity. Am J Cancer Res 2018; 8: 2528–2537.

30.

Ibrahim Khalil

Zhang

Muwonge

, et al. Efficacy and safety of therapeutic HPV vaccines to treat CIN 2/CIN 3 lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase II/III clinical trials. BMJ Open 2023; 13: e069616.

31.

Kamolratanakul

Pitisuttithum

Human papillomavirus vaccine efficacy and effectiveness against cancer. Vaccines (Basel) 2021; 9: 1413.

32.

, et al. A preclinical immunogenicity study of the recombinant human papillomavirus nine-valent virus-like particle vaccine. Vaccines (Basel) 2024; 12: 1356.

33.

Schiller

Castellsagué

Garland

SM.

A review of clinical trials of human papillomavirus prophylactic vaccines. Vaccine 2012; 30(Suppl. 5): F123–F138.

34.

Bogani

Ghelardi

Sopracordevole

, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination: a call for action in Italy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2023; 33: 1132–1139.

35.

Watson-Jones

Changalucha

Maxwell

, et al. Durability of immunogenicity at 5 years after a single dose of human papillomavirus vaccine compared with two doses in Tanzanian girls aged 9–14 years: results of the long-term extension of the DoRIS randomised trial. Lancet Glob Health 2025; 13: e319–e328.

36.

Kurosawa

Sekine

Yamaguchi

, et al. Long-term effects of human papillomavirus vaccination in clinical trials and real-world data: a systematic review. Vaccines (Basel) 2022; 10: 256.

37.

Restrepo

Herrera

Samakoses

, et al. Ten-year follow-up of 9-valent human papillomavi8rus vaccine: immunogenicity, effectiveness, and safety. Pediatrics 2023; 152: e2022060993.

38.

Hoes

Pasmans

Schurink-van

’t

Klooster

, et al. Review of long-term immunogenicity following HPV vaccination: gaps in current knowledge. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2022; 18: 1908059.

39.

Skinner

Szarewski

Romanowski

, et al. Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus 16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine in women older than 25 years: 4-year interim follow-up of the phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled VIVIANE study. Lancet (London, Engl) 2014; 384: 2213–2227.

40.

Agbenyega

Schuind

Adjei

, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of an Escherichia coli-produced bivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (Cecolin) in girls aged 9–14 years in Ghana and Bangladesh: a randomised, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2025; 25: 861–872.

41.

Zhu

Zhong

Huang

, et al. Head-to-head immunogenicity comparison of an Escherichia coli-produced 9-valent human papillomavirus vaccine and Gardasil 9 in women aged 18–26 years in China: a randomised blinded clinical trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2023; 23: 1313–1322.

42.

Sharma

Parekh

Pujari

, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of a new quadrivalent HPV vaccine in girls and boys aged 9–14 years versus an established quadrivalent HPV vaccine in women aged 15–26 years in India: a randomised, active-controlled, multicentre, phase 2/3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24: 1321–1333.

43.

Meng

Wang

, et al. Post-marketing safety surveillance of HPV vaccines in Anhui province, China, 2017–2024. Vaccines (Basel) 2025; 13: 846.

44.

Zhai

Tumban

Gardasil-9: a global survey of projected efficacy. Antiviral Res 2016; 130: 101–109.

45.

Movahed

Darzi

Mahdavi

, et al. The potential use of therapeutics and prophylactic mRNA vaccines in human papillomavirus (HPV). Virol J 2024; 21: 124.

46.

Soliman

Oredein

Dass

CR.

Update on safety and efficacy of HPV vaccines: focus on gardasil. Int J Mol Cell Med 2021; 10: 101–113.

47.

Yang

Bracken

Update on the new 9-valent vaccine for human papillomavirus prevention. Can Fam Physician Med Fam Can 2016; 62: 399–402.

48.

CDC. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine safety, 2025.

49.

WHO. WHO PUBLIC ASSESSMENT REPORT (WHOPAR). Cecolin® recombinant human papillomavirus bivalent (types 16, 18) Vaccine. Xiamen Innovax Biotech Co., Ltd., China, 2025.

50.

Santos

SAD

Sato

Basilio

PHG

, et al. Comparison between the safety of the HPV vaccine versus placebo: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Pediatr 2025; 101: 101411.

51.

Eun

B-W

Bahar

Xavier

, et al. Post-marketing surveillance study of the safety of the HPV-16/18 vaccine in Korea (2017–2021). Hum Vaccin Immunother 2023; 19: 2184756.

52.

Zhang

Liu

, et al. Post-marketing safety surveillance study of a 9-valent human papillomavirus vaccine in individuals aged 16–26 years in Chongqing, China. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2023; 19: 2281700.

53.

Glenn

Nonzee

Tieu

, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in the transition between adolescence and adulthood. Vaccine 2021; 39: 3435–3444.

54.

Gezimu

Bekele

Bekana

, et al. Males’ access to human papillomavirus vaccination in resource-limited settings. Immunotargets Ther 2024; 13: 95–98.

55.

Naidoo

Govender

Mantell

JE.

Breaking barriers: why including boys and men is key to HPV prevention. BMC Med 2024; 22: 525.

56.

Mahajan

Kadam

McCann

, et al. Early adoption of innovation in HPV prevention strategies: closing the gap in cervical cancer. Ecancermedicalscience 2024; 18: 1762.

57.

Gallagher

LaMontagne

Watson-Jones

Status of HPV vaccine introduction and barriers to country uptake. Vaccine 2018; 36: 4761–4767.

58.

Gopalani

Janitz

Burkhart

, et al. HPV vaccination coverage and factors among American Indians in Cherokee Nation. Cancer Causes Control: CCC. 2023; 34: 267–275.

59.

Dorji

Nopsopon

Tamang

, et al. Human papillomavirus vaccination uptake in low-and middle-income countries: a meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicine. 2021; 34: 100836.

60.

Asempah

Ikpebe

Accelerating HPV vaccination in Africa for health equity. Glob Health Res Policy 2024; 9: 37.

61.

Carlton

Pamba

Ryan

, et al. Facilitators and barriers to implementation of HPV vaccination in Tanzania: a mixed-methods study exploring perspectives from national, subnational, and community stakeholders, 2018–2023. Vaccine 2025; 62: 127560.

62.

Buckland

Sanyal

Ranheim

, et al. Vaccine process technology—a decade of progress. Biotechnol Bioeng 2024; 121: 2604–2635.

63.

Vicente

Roldão

Peixoto

, et al. Large-scale production and purification of VLP-based vaccines. J Invertebr Pathol 2011; 107(Suppl.): S42–S48.

64.

Shah

Shetty

Ganesh

, et al. Challenges to human papillomavirus vaccine acceptability among women in South India: an exploratory study. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2021; 105: 966–973.

65.

Coursey

Muralidhar

Srinivas

, et al. Acceptability of HPV vaccination for cervical cancer prevention amongst emerging adult women in rural Mysore, India: a mixed-methods study. BMC Public Health 2024; 24: 2139.

66.

Bénard

Drolet

Laprise

, et al. Potential population-level effectiveness of one-dose HPV vaccination in low-income and middle-income countries: a mathematical modelling analysis. Lancet Public Health 2023; 8: e788–e99.

67.

Rosser

Wysong

Rosen

, et al. HPV vaccine delivery strategies to reach out-of-school girls in low- and middle-income countries: a narrative review. Vaccines (Basel) 2025; 13: 433.

68.

Ogolla

Masinde

Mbeke

AM.

Factors associated with human papilloma virus vaccine uptake before the health awareness, learning and education intervention in Korogocho Informal Settlements in Nairobi County, Kenya. Ecancermedicalscience 2025; 19: 1892.

69.

Adeyanju

Essoh

T-A

Sidibe

, et al. Human papillomavirus vaccination acceleration and introduction in sub-Saharan Africa: a multi-country cohort analysis. Vaccines 2024; 12: 489.

70.

Fiander

AN.

The prevention of cervical cancer in Africa. Womens Health (London) 2011; 7: 121–132.

71.

Gultekin

Ramirez

Broutet

, et al. World health organization call for action to eliminate cervical cancer globally. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2020; 30: 426–427.

72.

The Lancet O. Global elimination of cervical cancer is achievable-with commitment. Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 1467.

73.

Barnabas

Brown

Onono

, et al. Durability of single-dose HPV vaccination in young Kenyan women: randomized controlled trial 3-year results. Nat Med 2023; 29: 3224–3232.

74.

Gilca

Sauvageau

Panicker

, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of a mixed vaccination schedule with one dose of nonavalent and one dose of bivalent HPV vaccine versus two doses of nonavalent vaccine–a randomized clinical trial. Vaccine 2018; 36: 7017–7024.

75.

Bao

Huang

, et al. The clinical effectiveness of single-dose human papillomavirus vaccination. Vaccines (Basel) 2024; 12: 956.

76.

Han

Zhang

Chen

, et al. Global HPV vaccination programs and coverage rates: a systematic review. EClinicalMedicine. 2025; 84: 103290.

77.

Tobaiqy

MacLure

A systematic review of human papillomavirus vaccination challenges and strategies to enhance uptake. Vaccines (Basel) 2024; 12: 746.

78.

Pieper

Kotte

Ober

The effect of a voucher incentive on a survey response rate in the clinical setting: a quasi-randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018; 18: 86.

79.

Akumbom

Lee

Reynolds

, et al. Cost and effectiveness of HPV vaccine delivery strategies: a systematic review. Prev Med Rep 2022; 26: 101734.

80.

Slavkovsky

Callen

Pecenka

, et al. Costs of human papillomavirus vaccine delivery in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Vaccine 2024; 42: 1200–1210.

81.

Huber

Wang

Roden

, et al. RG1-VLP and other L2-based, broad-spectrum HPV vaccine candidates. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 1044.

82.

Ahmels

Mariz

Braspenning-Wesch

, et al. Next generation L2-based HPV vaccines cross-protect against cutaneous papillomavirus infection and tumor development. Front Immunol 2022; 13: 1010790.

83.

Mariz

Putzker

Sehr

, et al. Advances on two serological assays for human papillomavirus provide insights on the reactivity of antibodies against a cross-neutralization epitope of the minor capsid protein L2. Front Immunol 2023; 14: 1272018.

84.

Bei

Gao

Zhao

, et al. Immunogenicity assessment of a 14-valent human papillomavirus vaccine candidate in mice. Vaccines (Basel) 2024; 12: 1262.

85.

Olczak

Matsui

Wong

, et al. RG2-VLP: a vaccine designed to broadly protect against anogenital and skin human papillomaviruses causing human cancer. J Virol 2022; 96: e00566-22.

86.

Trimble

Morrow

Kraynyak

, et al. Safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of VGX-3100, a therapeutic synthetic DNA vaccine targeting human papillomavirus 16 and 18 E6 and E7 proteins for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial. Lancet (London, Engl) 2015; 386: 2078–2088.

87.

Ding

Zhang

, et al. Effectiveness of combination therapy with ISA101 vaccine for the treatment of human papillomavirus-induced cervical cancer. Front Oncol 2022; 12: 990877.

88.

Smalley Rumfield

Pellom

Morillon Ii

, et al. Immunomodulation to enhance the efficacy of an HPV therapeutic vaccine. J Immunother Cancer 2020; 8: e000612.

89.

Galicia-Carmona

Arango-Bravo

Serrano-Olvera

, et al. ADXS11-001 LM-LLO as specific immunotherapy in cervical cancer. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2021; 17: 2617–2625.

90.

Basu

Mehta

Jain

, et al. A randomized phase 2 study of ADXS11-001 listeria monocytogenes-listeriolysin O immunotherapy with or without cisplatin in treatment of advanced cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2018; 28: 764–772.

91.

Di Tucci

Schiavi

Faiano

, et al. Therapeutic vaccines and immune checkpoints inhibition options for gynecological cancers. Crit Rev Oncol/Hematol 2018; 128: 30–42.

92.

Oladejo

Paulishak

Wood

Synergistic potential of immune checkpoint inhibitors and therapeutic cancer vaccines. Semin Cancer Biol 2023; 88: 81–95.

93.

Boilesen

Nielsen

Holst

PJ.

Novel antigenic targets of HPV therapeutic vaccines. Vaccines 2021; 9: 1262.

94.

Wang

Huang

, et al. Current status and future directions for the development of human papillomavirus vaccines. Front Immunol 2024; 15: 1362770.

95.

Cai

Human papillomavirus-related cancer vaccine strategies. Vaccines 2024; 12: 1291.

96.

Hirth

Disparities in HPV vaccination rates and HPV prevalence in the United States: a review of the literature. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2019; 15: 146–155.

97.

Bhalerao

Gotarkar

Muneshwar

The impact of HPV vaccination on cervical cancer in adolescent females: a narrative review. J Family Med Prim Care 2024; 13: 4775–4782.

98.

Burger

Smith

Killen

, et al. Projected time to elimination of cervical cancer in the USA: a comparative modelling study. Lancet Public Health 2020; 5: e213–e222.

99.

Patel

Brotherton

Pillsbury

, et al. The impact of 10 years of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in Australia: what additional disease burden will a nonavalent vaccine prevent? Euro Surveill 2018; 23: 1700737.

100.

Schiller

Kreimer

AR.

An HPV vaccine from India: broadening possibilities for cervical cancer control. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24: 1288–1289.

101.

Chabeda

Yanez

RJR

Lamprecht

, et al. Therapeutic vaccines for high-risk HPV-associated diseases. Papillomavirus Res 2018; 5: 46–58.

102.

Sierra

Carvajal

Dull

, et al. Human papillomavirus type 16 and 18 viral clearance and progression to precancer among women aged 18–25 years enrolled in the Costa Rica HPV prophylactic vaccine trial (CVT). Vaccine 2025; 50: 126841.

103.

Cai

Tan

Miao

, et al. Effectiveness and safety of therapeutic vaccines for precancerous cervical lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol 2022; 12: 918331.

104.

Kawana

Kobayashi

Ikeda

, et al. Phase I and II randomized clinical trial of an oral therapeutic vaccine targeting human papillomavirus for treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 and 3. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2023; 7: pkad101.

105.

Harper

Nieminen

Donders

, et al. The efficacy and safety of Tipapkinogen Sovacivec therapeutic HPV vaccine in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 and 3: randomized controlled phase II trial with 2.5 years of follow-up. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 153: 521–529.

106.

Eerkens

Esajas

Brummel

, et al. Vvax001, a therapeutic vaccine, for patients with HPV16-positive high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a phase II trial. Clin Cancer Res 2025; 31: 1016–1026.

107.

Wei

Zhao

Description of CRISPR-Cas9 development and its prospects in human papillomavirus-driven cancer treatment. Front Immunol 2022; 13: 1037124.

108.

Khairkhah

Bolhassani

Najafipour

Current and future direction in treatment of HPV-related cervical disease. J Mol Med (Berlin, Germany) 2022; 100: 829–845.

109.

Jallah

Anjankar

Nankong

FA.

Public health approach in the elimination and control of cervical cancer: a review. Cureus 2023; 15: e44543.

110.

Kitui

Juma

Ndalama

, et al. Trends in uptake and impact of thermostable vaccines in Africa. Ther Adv Vaccin Immunother 2025; 13: 25151355251341662.