Quadrivalent Vaccine against Human Papillomavirus to Prevent Anogenital Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A phase 3 trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of a prophylactic quadrivalent vaccine in preventing anogenital diseases associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6, 11, 16, and 18. METHODS: In this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial involving 5455 women between the ages of 16 and 24 years, we assigned 2723 women to receive vaccine and 2732 to receive placebo at day 1, month 2, and month 6. The coprimary composite end points were the incidence of genital warts, vulvar or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia, or cancer and the incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cancer associated with HPV type 6, 11, 16, or 18. Data for the primary analysis were collected for a per-protocol susceptible population of women who had no virologic evidence of HPV type 6, 11, 16, or 18 through 1 month after administration of the third dose. RESULTS: The women were followed for an average of 3 years after administration of the first dose. In the per-protocol population, those followed for vulvar, vaginal, or perianal disease included 2261 women (83%) in the vaccine group and 2279 (83%) in the placebo group. Those followed for cervical disease included 2241 women (82%) in the vaccine group and 2258 (83%) in the placebo group. Vaccine efficacy was 100% for each of the coprimary end points. In an intention-to-treat analysis, including those with prevalent infection or disease caused by vaccine-type and non-vaccine-type HPV, vaccination reduced the rate of any vulvar or vaginal perianal lesions regardless of the causal HPV type by 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15 to 49), and the rate of cervical lesions regardless of the causal HPV type by 20% (95% CI, 8 to 31). CONCLUSIONS: The quadrivalent vaccine significantly reduced the incidence of HPV-associated anogenital diseases in young women. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00092521 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".