Sustained immunogenicity of the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine administered as a two-dose schedule in adolescent girls: Five-year clinical data and modeling predictions from a randomized study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this randomized, partially-blind study ( clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT00541970), the licensed formulation of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine (20 μg each of HPV-16/18 antigens) was found highly immunogenic up to 4 y after first vaccination, whether administered as a 2-dose (2D) schedule in girls 9-14 y or 3-dose (3D) schedule in women 15-25 y. This end-of-study analysis extends immunogenicity and safety data until Month (M) 60, and presents antibody persistence predictions estimated by piecewise and modified power law models. Healthy females (age stratified: 9-14, 15-19, 20-25 y) were randomized to receive 2D at M0,6 (N = 240 ) or 3D at M0,1,6 (N = 239). Here, results are reported for girls 9-14 y (2D) and women 15-25 y (3D). Seropositivity rates, geometric mean titers (by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) and geometric mean titer ratios (GMRs; 3D/2D; post-hoc exploratory analysis) were calculated. All subjects seronegative pre-vaccination in the according-to-protocol immunogenicity cohort were seropositive for anti-HPV-16 and -18 at M60. Antibody responses elicited by the 2D and 3D schedules were comparable at M60, with GMRs close to 1 (anti-HPV-16: 1.13 [95% confidence interval: 0.82-1.54]; anti-HPV-18: 1.06 [0.74-1.51]). Statistical modeling predicted that in 95% of subjects, antibodies induced by 2D and 3D schedules could persist above natural infection levels for ≥ 21 y post-vaccination. The vaccine had a clinically acceptable safety profile in both groups. In conclusion, a 2D M0,6 schedule of the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine was immunogenic for up to 5 y in 9-14 y-old girls. Statistical modeling predicted that 2D-induced antibodies could persist for longer than 20 y.
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 | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".