Nine-valent HPV vaccine efficacy against related diseases and definitive therapy: comparison with historic placebo population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Nine-valent human papillomavirus (9vHPV) vaccine efficacy against disease and cervical surgeries related to all nine vaccine components was assessed compared with a historic placebo population. This was not assessed in the 9vHPV vaccine efficacy trial since the trial was quadrivalent HPV (qHPV) vaccine-controlled, efficacy was measured for the five HPV types covered only by 9vHPV vaccine (HPV31/33/45/52/58), but not the four types covered by both vaccines (HPV6/11/16/18). METHODS: Three international, randomized, double-blind studies were conducted using the same methodology. In the 9vHPV vaccine study (NCT00543543), 7106 and 7109 women received 9vHPV or qHPV vaccine, respectively. In the historic qHPV vaccine studies (FUTURE I [NCT00092521] and II [NCT00092534]), 8810 and 8812 women received qHPV vaccine or placebo, respectively, based on the same eligibility criteria. Cervical cytological testing was performed regularly. Biopsy or definitive therapy specimens were assessed for HPV DNA. RESULTS: Among women negative for 14 HPV types prior to vaccination, incidence of high-grade cervical disease (9vHPV, n = 2 cases; placebo, n = 141 cases) and cervical surgery (9vHPV, n = 3 cases; placebo, n = 170 cases) related to the nine HPV types was reduced by 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.6-99.7) and 97.8% (95% CI, 93.4-99.4), respectively. The 9vHPV vaccine did not prevent disease related to vaccine HPV types detected at baseline, but significantly reduced cervical, vulvar, and vaginal diseases related to other vaccine HPV types. CONCLUSIONS: Effective implementation of the 9vHPV vaccine may substantially reduce the burden of HPV-related diseases and related medical procedures. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00543543, NCT00092521, NCT00092534.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".