Immunotherapy of vulvar high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (vHSIL) is investigated as an alternative for surgery, because of high comorbidity and risk of recurrence. Limited evidence exists... Show moreImmunotherapy of vulvar high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (vHSIL) is investigated as an alternative for surgery, because of high comorbidity and risk of recurrence. Limited evidence exists on the role and composition of the immune microenvironment in current immunotherapeutic approaches for vHSIL. The vHSIL of 29 patients biopsied before treatment with imiquimod were analyzed by two multiplex seven-color immunofluorescence panels to investigate the pre-existing T-cell and myeloid cell composition in relation to treatment response. The samples were scanned with the Vectra multispectral imaging system. Cells were automatically phenotyped and counted with inForm advanced image analysis software. Cell counts and composition were compared to that of vHSIL patients before therapeutic vaccination (n = 29) and to healthy vulva (n = 27). Our data show that the immune microenvironment of complete responders (CR) to imiquimod resembled the coordinated infiltration with type 1 CD4(+)and CD8(+)T cells and CD14(+)inflammatory myeloid cells also found in healthy vulva. However, more CD8(+)T cells and FoxP3(+)regulatory T cells were present in CR. The lesions of partial responders (PR) lacked such a coordinated response and displayed an impaired influx of CD14(+)inflammatory myeloid cells. Importantly, complete responses after imiquimod or therapeutic vaccination showed the same dependency on a pre-existing coordinated type 1 T-cell and CD14(+)myeloid cell infiltration. In conclusion, a good clinical outcome after two different forms of immunotherapy for vHSIL is associated with the presence of a primary inflammatory process resulting in the coordinated influx of several types of immune cells which is then amplified. Show less
Poelgeest, M.I.E. van; Welters, M.J.P.; Vermeij, R.; Stynenbosch, L.F.M.; Loof, N.M.; Berends-van der Meer, D.M.A.; ... ; Burg, S.H. van der 2016
Conclusions: This new study confirms that clinical efficacy of ISA101 vaccination is related to the strength of vaccine-induced HPV16-specific T-cell immunity and is an effective therapy for HPV16... Show moreConclusions: This new study confirms that clinical efficacy of ISA101 vaccination is related to the strength of vaccine-induced HPV16-specific T-cell immunity and is an effective therapy for HPV16-induced high-grade VIN/VaIN. (C) 2016 AACR. Show less
BACKGROUND: Misoprostol is an agent that may ripen the cervix in nonpregnant women. Here, we investigate whether vaginal misoprostol administered prior to intrauterine device (IUD) insertion... Show moreBACKGROUND: Misoprostol is an agent that may ripen the cervix in nonpregnant women. Here, we investigate whether vaginal misoprostol administered prior to intrauterine device (IUD) insertion reduces the number of failed insertions, insertion-related complications and pain during insertion. METHODS: We conducted a double-blinded, multicenter randomized controlled trial among patients requesting an IUD. Nulli- and multi-parous women were included, and both copper-containing and levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs were used. Participants were allocated to either 400 mu g misoprostol or placebo (administered 3 h prior to IUD insertion). The primary outcome measure was failed insertion. Secondary outcome measures were insertion-related complications, pain, difficulty of insertion and side-effects. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy participants were randomized. After drop out for various reasons (mainly no show), 199 participants had an IUD inserted; 102 received misoprostol and 97 received placebo. Only three insertions failed; two in the misoprostol group and one in the placebo group [P = 0.59, relative risk (RR) 1.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2-20.6]. The overall incidence of insertion-related complications was 21.8% in the misoprostol versus 19.1% in the placebo group (mainly vasovagal-like reactions) and did not differ between groups (P = 0.65, RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.7-2.0). No difference in pain scores between groups was found. Side-effects were more common in the misoprostol group (P = 0.05, RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.7). CONCLUSION: The study showed no benefit for use of misoprostol prior to IUD insertion. However, there is a tendency of possible harm regarding side-effects. Therefore, we would not recommend standard pretreatment with misoprostol. Show less
