HPV16-L1-specific antibody response is associated with clinical remission of high-risk HPV-positive early dysplastic lesions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: The present study was aimed at clarifying if use of a rapid human papillomavirus type 16 L1-specific antibody test could be used to improve clinical management of high-risk HPV-positive low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL)/high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was nested within a prospective study of 801 patients with early dysplastic high-risk HPV-positive lesions to examine the prognostic significance of HPV-L1 protein detection. Serum samples of 87 patients were tested with a rapid HPV16-L1-specific antibody test. The results were correlated with the clinical outcome during 66 months of follow-up. RESULTS: A combined analysis of the 22 antibody-positive women showed that 17 were also L1 protein-positive, and 5 were L1 capsid protein-negative. An HPV-specific immune competence strongly correlates with clinical remission of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (76.6%). For L1 antigen and HPV16-L1 antibody double-positive women, the risk of progression to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 was low (5.8%). CONCLUSION: The rapid anti-HPV16-L1 test could be a promising tool to improve risk assessment and appropriate clinical management of high-risk HPV-positive early dysplastic lesions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".