MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339853485 · doi:10.1586/14760584.2016.1124763

Human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine for the prevention of cervical cancer and HPV-related diseases

2016· review· en· W2339853485 on OpenAlexaff
S. Rachel Skinner, Dan Apter, N. De Carvalho, Diane M. Harper, Ryo Konno, Jorma Paavonen, Barbara Romanowski, Cecília Roteli-Martins, Nansa Burlet, Attila Mihalyi, Frank Struyf

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Vaccines · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsMedicineCervical cancerGenital wartsHPV infectionPopulationHPV vaccinesEpidemiologyCohortVaccine trialSex organClinical trialOncologyGynecologyImmunologyInternal medicineCancerEnvironmental healthBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vaccines are available against human papillomavirus (HPV), the causal agent of cervical and other cancers. Efficacy data from the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine clinical trial program were reviewed. Six randomized, controlled phase II/III trials evaluating cervical endpoints enrolled women from diverse populations and geographical locations. The program analyzed extensively the cohorts most relevant from a public health perspective: the total vaccinated cohort (TVC), approximating a general population including those with existing or previous HPV infection, and TVC-naïve, approximating a population of young women before sexual debut. Results show that the vaccine reduces HPV-16/18 infection and associated cervical endpoints in women regardless of age, location, or sexual experience. It provides cross-protection against some non-vaccine oncogenic HPV types and types causing genital warts, and may be effective against vulvar, oral, and anal HPV infection. Early epidemiology data following its introduction suggest a decline in the prevalence of vaccine and some non-vaccine HPV types.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.394 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of VaccinesSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207