Increased Risk for Cervical Disease Progression of French Women Infected with the Human Papillomavirus Type 16 E6-350G Variant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To test the significance of human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 and HPV16 E6 variants as risk factors for viral persistence and progression to high-grade lesion, we did a nested case-control study within a cohort study of >15,000 Caucasian French women. Three groups infected with high-risk HPV were compared: (a) women with cleared infection (controls, n = 201), (b) women with persistent infection (cases, n = 87), and (c) women who progressed into high-grade lesion (cases, n = 58). Women with persistent HPV infection and those that progressed into high-grade lesions were likelier to harbor HPV16 than other high-risk HPV types [odds ratio (OR), 2.4; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.3-4.3 and OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.2-8.1, respectively]. Notably, especially elevated ORs of persistence (3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.7) and progression (6.2; 95% CI, 2.7-14.3) were found among women who harbored the HPV16 350G variant. Thus, HPV type and HPV16 variant seem to be risk factors for viral persistence and progression of infections into high-grade cervical 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".