Three-Year Follow-up of 2-Dose Versus 3-Dose HPV Vaccine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Human papillomavirus (HPV) antibody responses to the 9-valent human papillomavirus (9vHPV) vaccine among girls and boys (aged 9-14 years) receiving 2-dose regimens (months 0, 6 or 0, 12) were noninferior to a 3-dose regimen (months 0, 2, 6) in young women (aged 16-26 years) 4 weeks after last vaccination in an international, randomized, open-label trial (NCT01984697). We assessed response durability through month 36. METHODS: = 314) of 9vHPV vaccine. Anti-HPV geometric mean titers (GMTs) were assessed by competitive Luminex immunoassay (cLIA) and immunoglobulin G-Luminex immunoassay (IgG-LIA) through month 36. RESULTS: Anti-HPV GMTs were highest 1 month after the last 9vHPV vaccine regimen dose, decreased sharply during the subsequent 12 months, and then decreased more slowly. GMTs 2 to 2.5 years after the last regimen dose in girls and boys given 2 doses were generally similar to or greater than GMTs in young women given 3 doses. Across HPV types, most boys and girls who received 2 doses (cLIA: 81%-100%; IgG-LIA: 91%-100%) and young women who received 3 doses (cLIA: 78%-98%; IgG-LIA: 91%-100%) remained seropositive 2 to 2.5 years after the last regimen dose. CONCLUSIONS: Antibody responses persisted through 2 to 2.5 years after the last dose of a 2-dose 9vHPV vaccine regimen in girls and boys. In girls and boys, antibody responses generated by 2 doses administered 6 to 12 months apart may be sufficient to induce high-level protective efficacy through at least 2 years after the second dose.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".