MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161147056 · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-20-1272

Male Circumcision Reduces Penile HPV Incidence and Persistence: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Kenya

2021· article· en· W3161147056 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer S. Smith, Danielle M. Backes, Michael G. Hudgens, Wenwen Mei, Hrishikesh Chakraborty, Eliane Rohner, Stephen Moses, Kawango Agot, Chris J.L.M. Meijer, Robin L. Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
FundersCenter for AIDS Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel HillNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Male circumcisionRandomized controlled trialHPV infectionGynecologyCumulative incidenceInternal medicineCohortPopulationCancerCervical cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Male circumcision reduces the risk of human immunodeficiency virus infection in men. We assessed the effect of male circumcision on the incidence and natural history of human papillomavirus (HPV) in a randomized clinical trial in Kisumu, Kenya. METHODS: Sexually active, 18- to 24-year-old men provided penile exfoliated cells for HPV DNA testing every 6 months for 2 years. HPV DNA was detected via GP5+/6+ PCR in glans/coronal sulcus and in shaft samples. HPV incidence and persistence were assessed by intent-to-treat analyses. RESULTS: A total of 2,193 men participated (1,096 randomized to circumcision; 1,097 controls). HPV prevalence was 50% at baseline for both groups and dropped to 23.7% at 24 months in the circumcision group, and 41.0% in control group. Incident infection of any HPV type over 24 months was lower among men in the circumcision group than in the control group [HR = 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-0.72]. Clearance rate of any HPV infection over 24 months was higher in the circumcision group than in the control group (HR = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.49-2.34). Lower HPV point-prevalence, lower HPV incidence, and higher HPV clearance in the circumcision group were observed in glans but not in shaft samples. CONCLUSION: Male circumcision reduced the risk of HPV acquisition and reinfection, and increased HPV clearance in the glans. IMPACT: Providing voluntary, safe, and affordable male circumcision should help reduce HPV infections in men, and consequently, HPV-associated disease in their partners.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionSame topicGenital Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207