Carrageenan as a Preventive Agent Against Human Papillomavirus Infection: A Narrative Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Carrageenan, an extract from red algae, was identified over a decade ago as a potent inhibitor of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in vitro. After this discovery, several studies evaluated carrageenan's anti-HPV activity in cells, experimental animals, and humans. We reviewed the evidence for carrageenan's anti-HPV activity. Studies had to be in vitro, in vivo, or in humans and report on carrageenan's anti-HPV activity. Of the 39 records identified in PubMed and 29 records in Clinicaltrials.gov, 22 records were included after screening: 8 in vitro (including 2 ex vivo), 3 in vivo, 5 in vitro and in vivo, 3 clinical studies, and 3 trial protocols. A total of 12 studies evaluated carrageenan exclusively, whereas 7 considered carrageenan combined with additional antiviral or other agents. One study protocol will evaluate carrageenan exclusively, and 2 others will evaluate carrageenan-combination products. Most clinical studies evaluated carrageenan's ability to prevent HPV acquisition (n = 4), whereas one study explored its ability to promote clearance of existing infection (defined as the absence of HPV DNA detection). Carrageenan's anti-HPV activity was observed consistently across study designs, except in 2 studies: 1 in vitro study where 2 of the HPV types tested were not significantly inhibited by carrageenan and 1 phase IIB trial in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. This review supports the premise that carrageenan, alone or in combination with other antiviral agents, might be a potential prevention strategy complementary to HPV vaccination for women.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it