MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414168572 · doi:10.1002/ijc.70119

Epidemiological approaches to evaluate clinical unmasking of <scp>HPV</scp> ‐associated cervical lesions in the <scp>HPV</scp> vaccination era

2025· article· en· W4414168572 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph E. Tota, Jaimie Z. Shing, Jeffrey N. Roberts, Elizabeth M. Anderson, Alfred J. Saah, Ariana Harari, Eduardo L. Franco, Melvin A. Kohn, Susanne K. Kjær

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaccinationEpidemiologyCervical cancerIncidence (geometry)DiseasePsychological interventionHPV vaccinesViral disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HPV vaccination reduces the risk of developing HPV-attributable cancers, including cervical cancer. However, an attenuation of HPV vaccine impact after the implementation of HPV vaccination may occur through clinical unmasking. Clinical unmasking is a distinct and complex phenomenon that arises in the absence of clinical interventions necessary to treat disease caused by high-risk vaccine-preventable HPV types (mainly HPV16) allowing uninterrupted progression of non-vaccine preventable types that are frequently present as co-infections. Clinical unmasking is distinct from viral unmasking, which is a diagnostic assay artifact, and from HPV type replacement, a theorized biological phenomenon requiring competition between HPV types, which has not yet been documented. All three processes could manifest as an apparent increase in cervical precancer/cancer by non-HPV vaccine types, resulting in a lower-than-anticipated vaccine impact based on projections derived from type attribution studies. Here, we describe these concepts and epidemiological approaches to evaluate clinical unmasking in the post-vaccination era. We propose a historical and a contemporaneous approach, highlighting key considerations and illustrating the potential outcomes with hypothetical data. Both approaches would have a similar outcome and interpretation: an increased incidence of precancerous lesions (CIN2+) due to non-vaccine preventable types among vaccinated versus unvaccinated women (historically in the pre-vaccination era, or contemporaneously) in the long term being indicative of clinical unmasking. Protection afforded by HPV vaccines against high-grade cervical precancers, irrespective of type, remains considerable. However, carefully designed studies are needed to investigate the potential impact of clinical unmasking and its implications on vaccine effectiveness in the post-vaccination era.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207