Could the human papillomavirus vaccines drive virulence evolution?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines hold great promise for preventing several cancers caused by HPV infections. Yet little attention has been given to whether HPV could respond evolutionarily to the new selection pressures imposed on it by the novel immunity response created by the vaccine. Here, we present and theoretically validate a mechanism by which the vaccine alters the transmission-recovery trade-off that constrains HPV's virulence such that higher oncogene expression is favoured. With a high oncogene expression strategy, the virus is able to increase its viral load and infected cell population before clearance by the vaccine, thus improving its chances of transmission. This new rapid cell-proliferation strategy is able to circulate between hosts with medium to high turnover rates of sexual partners. We also discuss the importance of better quantifying the duration of challenge infections and the degree to which a vaccinated host can shed virus. The generality of the models presented here suggests a wider applicability of this mechanism, and thus highlights the need to investigate viral oncogenicity from an evolutionary perspective.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".