The effect of a booster dose of quadrivalent or bivalent HPV vaccine when administered to girls previously vaccinated with two doses of quadrivalent HPV vaccine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This randomized, blinded study evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of a booster dose of Gardasil (qHPV) or Cervarix (bHPV) when administered to 12-13 year-old girls who were vaccinated at the age of 9-10 with 2 doses of qHPV (0-6 months). 366 out of 416 eligible girls participated in this follow-up study. Antibody titers were measured just before and one month post-booster. A Luminex Total IgG assay was used for antibody assessment and results are presented in Liminex Units (LU). Three years post-primary vaccination, 99-100% of subjects had detectable antibodies to 4HPV genotypes included in the qHPV with GMTs varying from 50 to 322 LU depending on genotype. After a booster dose of qHPV, a ≥4 fold increase of antibody titers to genotypes included in the vaccine was observed in 88-98% of subjects. Post-booster GMTs varied from 1666 to 4536 LU depending on genotype. These GMTs were 1.1 to 1.8-fold higher when compared to those observed one month post-second dose. After a booster of bHPV, a ≥4 fold increase of antibody titers to HPV16 and HPV18 was observed in 93-99% of subjects. The anti-HPV16 and HPV18 GMTs were 5458 and 2665 LU, respectively. These GMTs were 1.2 and 1.8 higher than those observed in the qHPV group (both P < 0.01). In bHPV group a 1.4-1.6-fold increase of antibody GMTs to HPV6 and HPV11was also observed (P < 0.001). The safety profile was acceptable for both vaccines. Both qHPV and bHPV increase antibody titers when given as a booster to girls previously vaccinated with 2 doses of qHPV. The magnitude of the immune response after booster is vaccine-dependent and has the same pattern as that reported after primary vaccination with qHPV or bHPV. When given as a booster, both vaccines have an acceptable safety profile. Longer follow-up studies are warranted to assess the need of booster doses.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".