Back

A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Phase I/II Clinical Trial of a Human Papillomavirus Therapeutic Vaccine, PepCan, for Reducing Head and Neck Cancer Recurrence

Bivens, E.; Atiq, O.; Evans, T.; Bilami, M.; Brown, G.; Crane, J.; Darwish, N.; Faulkner, J. L.; Govindarajan, R.; Johnson, A.; Kurilung, A.; Lazarenko, O.; Lu, Y.-C. W.; Marsh, K.; Moreno, M.; Nookaew, I.; Robeson, M.; Sunde, J.; Ussery, D.; Duval, E.; Wilman, M.; Nakagawa, M.

2026-01-12 oncology
10.64898/2026.01.09.26343801 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesHead and neck cancer (HNC) has a high recurrence rate. Safety and effectiveness of PepCan in reducing recurrence for HNC patients were assessed. Methods and analysisPepCan consists of four human papillomavirus 16 (HPV 16) E6 peptides and a Candida skin testing reagent (Candin(R), Nielsen Biosciences) as a vaccine adjuvant. Since Candida was known to have a general immune stimulating effects, patients were recruited regardless of their HPV status. Men and women with HNC who had no evidence of disease after standard surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiation treatments were enrolled. They were randomized at 3:1 to PepCan versus placebo. Seven intradermal injections of PepCan or placebo (saline) were given every 3 weeks (first 4 injections) or 3 months (last 3 injections). They were followed with two visits 6 months apart. Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5, and efficacy was assessed based on not having recurrence within 2 years. In addition, immune responses were examined using enzyme-linked immunospot assay for HPV 16 E6 response, fluorescent-activated cell sorter analysis for peripheral immune cells, and T cell repertoire analysis. Peripheral cytokines and gut and oral microbiome were also analyzed. ResultsSeventeen patients were enrolled. The most common adverse events were grades 1 and 2 injection site reactions, and they occurred more frequently in the PepCan group (p<0.0001). Two patients had allergic reactions (grade 2 and grade 3), at the 6th vaccination, which were considered to be a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). No serious adverse events were reported. In the intention-to-treat analysis (ITT), 45% (5/11) had non-recurrence in the PepCan group while 80% (4/5) had non-recurrence in the placebo group. For the per-protocol (PP) analysis, non-recurrence was 56% (5/9) for PepCan and 80% (4/5) for placebo. These differences were not statistically significant. Those who received PepCan and experienced non-recurrence had higher new T cell immune responses to HPV 16 E6 (p=0.05 for ITT and p=0.02 for PP). Pre-vaccination T helper type 1 cells were higher in the PepCan non-recurrence group compared to the PepCan recurrence group (p=0.01 for ITT and PP). ConclusionsPepCan is safe although DLT can occur after multiple injections of PepCan. PepCan does not seem to be effective in reducing recurrence; however, the results are inconclusive given the small patient numbers. What is already known on this topic O_LIHead and neck cancer (HNC) has a high recurrence rate after reaching no evidence of disease status after standard therapies including chemotherapy, radiation, immunotherapy and survey. However, no intervention is available to reduce recurrence. C_LI What this study adds O_LIA therapeutic human papillomavirus vaccine called PepCan was tested in a clinical trial and has been shown to be safe. C_LI How this study might affect research, practice or policy O_LIIf a sufficiently powered study demonstrates efficacy in reducing recurrence rate, then how HNC patients are treated after achieving the no evidence of disease status will change. C_LI

Published in Oncotarget · training set

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.