HSV -2, page-13

A therapeutic vaccine doesn't have to cure anything (an ideal one would). A real definition of a therapeutic vaccine is a substance given to induce an immune response for a desired effect. In this case a therapeutic vaccine to induce an immune response to HSV2 to reduce lesions. An ideal case of reduced lesions will results in a reduction of the spread of HSV2 as it is the primary way for transmission (main source of viral shedding). The reason they changed the definition of this vaccine to being purely therapeutic is the lack of antibodies and this will be further evaluated in the phase II trials. I’m aware of extensive research into HSV1 with antibodies and applying the same principals to HSV2, I’m not convinced that it will even benefit the vaccine.

A prophylactic vaccine with a 100% efficacy is an ideal scenario and very few vaccines approved now have reached that level. A therapeutic vaccine provides a niche area which will likely have better government backing if it is ultimately successful. In addition, HSV2 is a very complicated virus as it is infecting the neurons and a prophylactic vaccine may actually provide an easier target for a successful vaccine (in my opinion it does).

On a side note: I have found it interesting that some posters on AHZ have tried to poke holes in the HSV2 vaccine and come up with some very weak points. I can think of several points (traits of the vaccine) that are less than appealing for a vaccine and raise greater concerns for its future.