Use of a carrageenan‐based gel had no impact on anal HPVs 16 and 18 viral loads in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Lubricant Investigation in Men to Inhibit Transmission of human papillomavirus (HPV) Infection randomized control trial in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) found that carrageenan use neither reduced acquisition of anal HPV infections nor influenced infection clearance. To investigate carrageenan's lack of protective effect, we compared the change in anal HPV16 and HPV18 viral loads following carrageenan use against placebo. We restricted our analysis to participants who completed the first four study visits and had a valid baseline sample (n = 161, 54 HIV-positive). Samples were tested for HPV detection using the linear array PCR assay. HPV16- and/or HPV18-positive samples were tested for viral load using real-time PCR. For participants who tested HPV16- (n = 29) or HPV18-positive (n = 10) at least once across visits 1-4, we compared the change in type-specific viral load between study arms using the Mann-Whitney U test. Although the median net change in HPV16 and HPV18 viral loads across visits 1-4 was higher in the treatment than placebo arm (HPV16: 0.68 vs. 0.18 copies/cell, p = 0.60; HPV18: 18.32 vs. 10.12 copies/cell, p = 0.52), these differences were not statistically significant. Results were similar by HIV status. Carrageenan use did not impact anal HPV16 or HPV18 viral loads, which may further explain its lack of protective effect in gbMSM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".