Immune response after one dose of HPV vaccine among girls and boys and the impact of a second dose given after 3 or more years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Initially approved as a three-dose regimen, evolving evidence has supported the efficacy of reduced-dose schedules. Single-dose HPV vaccine data among males remain scarce. This study assesses the persistence of antibodies against HPV16/18 following a single HPV vaccine dose and the immune response to a subsequent delayed dose administered at least three years later in girls and boys. METHODS: This single-group descriptive study involved youth from the Quebec City area, Canada, who received a single dose of 4vHPV (girls) or 9vHPV (boys) as part of the public school-based vaccination program. A blood sample was collected 3-10 years post-initial vaccination. Girls and boys then received one 9vHPV or 2vHPV booster dose, respectively, and had a second blood draw one month later. Serological assays were conducted using M9ELISA. RESULTS: Four years after the initial 9vHPV dose, among 141 boys aged 12 to 14 years 96.5 % and 97.9 % had detectable antibodies against HPV16 and HPV18, respectively. Among girls aged 13 to 24 years vaccinated 3-10 years prior with one 4vHPV dose, 95.0 % (HPV16) and 93.3 % (HPV18) had detectable antibodies. One-month post-second dose administration, all participants were seropositive for HPV16/18, with significant increases in geometric mean concentrations (GMCs). CONCLUSION: A single dose induces a strong and lasting immune response in girls (4vHPV) and boys (9vHPV), with a significant antibody anamnestic boost following a second dose administered several years later. These findings indicate the potential for a single-dose or a delayed booster strategy in both sexes, and support studies showing effectiveness of single-dose schedules. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03431246).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".