MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pregnancy Outcomes From the Pregnancy Registry of a Human Papillomavirus Type 6/11/16/18 Vaccine

2010· article· en· W4237719372 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adrian Dana, Karyn M. Buchanan, Mary Ann Goss, Margaret M. Seminack, Kristine E. Shields, Michael L. Cunningham, Richard M. Haupt

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyObstetricsGenital wartsAbortionPlaceboLive birthClinical trialGynecologyCervical cancerCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The (human papillomavirus) HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine is effective in girls and women 9 to 26 years of age for the prevention of cervical, vulvar, and vaginal cancer, and genital warts caused by human papillomavirus types 6, 11, 16, and 18. Because animal studies showed no evidence of impaired female fertility or adverse fetal outcomes, the vaccine is labeled Food and Drug Administration Pregnancy Category B. In the absence of well-controlled studies in pregnant women, however, the vaccine is not recommended for pregnant women. In five phase III clinical trials involving pregnancies with known outcome in 2008 vaccine and 2029 placebo-recipients with a range of follow-up of 0.6 to 3.7 years, no significant differences were found in the proportions of pregnancies resulting in live birth, congenital anomalies, fetal death, or spontaneous abortion. To establish a postmarketing safety profile of this vaccine, the manufacturer established a pregnancy registry in the United States, Canada, and France that collected data on pregnancy outcomes following exposure to the vaccine. Outcomes examined included live births, abortions, fetal deaths, and congenital anomalies. The present study presents the results of first 2 years of postlicensure surveillance based on voluntary postmarketing reports. The registry enrollment criteria included an identifiable patient and medical provider, and exposure to the vaccine within 1 month before the date of onset of the last menstrual period or at any time during pregnancy. The primary study outcomes were pregnancy outcomes and birth defects. To minimize the reporting bias toward abnormal outcomes that are inherent in retrospective reports, prospective reports were analyzed separately. Of the 517 prospective-exposed pregnancies with known outcome, 451 (87.2%) were live births (including three sets of twins) and resulted in 454 neonates. Over 96% of these 454 neonates were normal. The overall rate of spontaneous abortion among these prospective cases was 6.9 per 100 outcomes with a 95% confidence interval [CI] of 4.8 to 9.6. For the prospective reports, the rate of major birth malformations in the pregnancy registry was 2.2 per 100 live-born neonates (95% CI, 1.05–4.05). Seven fetal deaths occurred among the 454 neonates, which represents a rate of fetal deaths of 1.5 per 100 outcomes (95% CI, 0.60–3.09). These findings do not support a relationship between vaccine exposure and adverse pregnancy or fetal outcomes in the first 2 years of postlicensure surveillance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207