Efficacy of a carrageenan gel in preventing anal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection: interim analysis of the Lubricant Investigation in Men to Inhibit Transmission of HPV Infection (LIMIT-HPV) randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carrageenan, a non-toxic gelling agent derived from red algae, has potent anti-human papillomavirus (HPV) activity in in vitro and animal studies. We assessed, in an interim analysis, the efficacy of a carrageenan-based gel in reducing the risk of new detections of anal HPV among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM). METHODS: The LIMIT-HPV study (Lubricant Investigation in Men to Inhibit Transmission of HPV Infection) is a phase IIb, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial conducted in Montreal, Canada. gbMSM were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a carrageenan-based or placebo gel. Participants were instructed to apply the gel to the anus, condom and/or partners' penis before and-as required-during receptive anal intercourse. Questionnaire data and anal samples were collected at 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. We estimated new detections of anal HPV infection(s) detected via Linear Array using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Participants recruited from February 2016 to December 2019 were randomly assigned to the carrageenan (n=127) or placebo (n=128) arm. The efficacy and safety analyses included 201 and 210 participants. The median follow-up time was 7.6 months (range: 0-28.5) in the carrageenan group and 9.3 months (range: 0-40.7) in the placebo group. The HR for new detections was 1.21 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.70): 69.4% and 65.1% new detections of HPV in the carrageenan and placebo arms, respectively. More adverse events were reported in the carrageenan (59.8%) compared with the placebo (39.8%) arm. CONCLUSIONS: The interim analysis did not demonstrate a protective effect of carrageenan on the risk of new detections of anal HPV infection among gbMSM. Carrageenan gel use was associated with a higher proportion of adverse events. Given these findings and the (assumed) low probability that a beneficial effect would be found by the study's end, the trial was terminated as recommended by the Data Safety and Monitoring Board. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02354144.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".