Immune response to the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine administered as a 2-dose or 3-dose schedule up to 4 years after vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This randomized, partially-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT00541970) evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of 2-dose (2D) schedules of the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine. Results to month (M) 24 have been reported previously and we now report data to M48 focusing on the licensed vaccine formulation (20 μg each of HPV-16 and -18 antigens) administered at M0,6 compared with the standard 3-dose (3D) schedule (M0,1,6). Healthy females (age stratified: 9-14, 15-19, 20-25 years) were randomized to receive 2D at M0,6 (n = 240) or 3D at M0,1,6 (n = 239). In the according-to-protocol immunogenicity cohort, all initially seronegative subjects seroconverted for HPV-16 and -18 antibodies and remained seropositive up to M48. For both HPV-16 and -18, geometric mean antibody titer (GMT) ratios (3D schedule in women aged 15-25 years divided by 2D schedule in girls aged 9-14 years) at M36 and M48 were close to 1, as they were at M7 when non-inferiority was demonstrated. The kinetics of HPV-16, -18, -31, and -45 antibody responses were similar for both groups and HPV-16 and -18 GMTs were substantially higher than natural infection titers. The vaccine had a clinically acceptable safety profile in both groups. In summary, antibody responses to a 2D M0,6 schedule of the licensed vaccine formulation in girls aged 9-14 years appeared comparable to the standard 3D schedule in women aged 15-25 years up to 4 years after first vaccination. A 2D schedule could facilitate implementation of HPV vaccination programs and improve vaccine coverage and series completion rates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".