Vaccine Effectiveness Against 12-Month Incident and Persistent Anal Human Papillomavirus Infection Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Real-world evidence of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine effectiveness (VE) against longitudinal outcomes is lacking among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM). We compared 12-month incidence and persistence of anal HPV infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated GBM. Methods: We recruited GBM aged 16-30 years in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, Canada, from 2017 to 2019. Participants were followed over a median of 12 months (interquartile range, 12-13 months). Participants self-reported HPV vaccination and self-collected anal specimens for HPV DNA testing. We calculated prevalence ratios (PR) for 12-month cumulative incidence and persistence with ≥1 quadrivalent vaccine type (HPV 6/11/16/18) between vaccinated (≥1 dose at baseline) and unvaccinated participants using a propensity score-weighted, modified Poisson regression. Results: Among 248 participants, 109 (44.0%) were vaccinated at baseline, of whom 62.6% received 3 doses. PRs for HPV 6/11/16/18 were 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], .24-1.31) for cumulative incidence and 0.53 (95% CI, .25-1.14) for persistence. PRs were 0.23 (95% CI, .05-1.03) and 0.08 (95% CI, .01-.59) for incidence and persistence, respectively, among participants who received their first dose at age ≤23 years and 0.15 (95% CI, .03-.68) and 0.12 (95% CI, .03-.54) among participants who were sexually active for ≤5 years before vaccination. Conclusions: Findings support national recommendations for HPV vaccination at younger ages or soon after sexual debut.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".