Persistence of immune response following bivalent HPV vaccination: A follow-up study among girls routinely vaccinated with a two-dose schedule
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this cohort study, we examined antibody levels and avidity after a two-dose schedule (0, 6 months) of the bivalent HPV-vaccine in girls routinely vaccinated in the Dutch HPV-vaccination program, up to 2 years following vaccination. METHODS: A blood sample at 7, 12 and 24 months after the first dose and questionnaire data were collected (n = 56). HPV type-specific antibody concentrations (lU/ml) against seven types (HPV16/18/31/33/45/52/58) were assessed using a validated virus-like particles (VLP) multiplex immunoassay. Avidity was tested using a modification of this assay. RESULTS: Seropositivity for vaccine types HPV 16 and 18 was 100% up to month 24, but declined for HPV-types 31/33/45/52/58, although not statistically significant for HPV45. All Geometric Mean Concentrations (GMCs) declined by months 12 and 24, but remained high for HPV16/18. Between month 7 and 12, GMCs declined more for other types. High avidity antibodies were induced up to 24 months for vaccine types (75%, 76-78% and 81-82% at months 7, 12 and 24, respectively), but for other types antibody avidity was 16-29% at month 7, 20-32% at month 12 and 19-32% at month 24. CONCLUSIONS: GMCs declined over time for HPV-types 16/18/31/33/45/52/58, but remained high for vaccine-types HPV16/18 up to 24 months of follow-up. Antibody avidity was >75% for vaccine types but <35% for other HPV-types. Further follow-up of this cohort will provide insight into antibody and avidity kinetics over time.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".