TABLE 2.
Experimental outcome of intralesional cidofovir followed by DNA vaccinations (experiment no. 1)
| Group | No. of sites cured by cidofovir treatment | No. of sites recurrent after intralesional cure | No. of recurrent sites that regressed |
|---|---|---|---|
| A (no treatment) | NAa | NA | NA |
| B (E1, E2, E6 vaccination) | NA | NA | NA |
| C (E1, E2, E6 vaccination) | 6/8 (75%) | 2/6 (33%) | 1/2 (50%) |
| D (vector vaccination) | 8/10 (80%) | 7/8 (88%) | 0/7 (0%) |
| E (E1, E2, E6 vaccination) | 19/23 (83%) | 8/19 (42%) | 3/8 (38%) |
| F (vector vaccination) | 29/30 (97%) | 12/29 (41%) | 0/12 (0%) |
| C + E | 25/31 (81%) | 10/25 (40%)b | 4/10 (40%)c |
| D + F | 37/40 (93%) | 19/37 (51%) | 0/19 (0%) |
a
NA, not available.
b
Comparison with groups D plus F yielded a P value of 0.443 (Fisher exact test).
c
Comparison with groups D plus F yielded a P value of 0.009 (Fisher exact test).