Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32106879›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2020

Benefits and harms of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines: systematic review with meta-analyses of trial data from clinical study reports.

Lars Jørgensen, Peter C Gøtzsche, Tom Jefferson

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lars JørgensenNordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet 7811, Tagensvej 22, 2200, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-9737-0555
Peter C GøtzscheDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, København, Denmark.
Tom JeffersonNordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet 7811, Tagensvej 22, 2200, Copenhagen, Denmark. tj@cochrane.dk.
Rigshospitalet · DKCopenhagen Institute for Futures Studies · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the benefits and harms of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. DATA SOURCES: Clinical study reports obtained from the European Medicines Agency and GlaxoSmithKline from 2014 to 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised trials that compared an HPV vaccine with a placebo or active comparator in healthy participants of all ages. APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS: Two researchers extracted data and judged risk of bias with the Cochrane tool (version 2011). Risk ratio (RR) estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. OUTCOMES: Clinically relevant outcomes in intention to treat populations-including HPV-related cancer precursors irrespective of involved HPV types, treatment procedures and serious and general harms.

resultsTwenty-four of 50 eligible clinical study reports were obtained with 58,412 pages of 22 trials and 2 follow-up studies including 95,670 participants: 79,102 females and 16,568 males age 8-72; 393,194 person-years; and 49 months mean weighted follow-up. We judged all 24 studies to be at high risk of bias. Serious harms were incompletely reported for 72% of participants (68,610/95,670). Nearly all control participants received active comparators (48,289/48,595, 99%). No clinical study report included complete case report forms. At 4 years follow-up, the HPV vaccines reduced HPV-related carcinoma in situ (367 in the HPV vaccine group vs. 490 in the comparator group, RR 0.73 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.53 to 1.00], number needed to vaccinate [NNV] 387, P = 0.05, I

conclusionAt 4 years follow-up, the HPV vaccines decreased HPV-related cancer precursors and treatment procedures but increased serious nervous system disorders (exploratory analysis) and general harms. As the included trials were primarily designed to assess benefits and were not adequately designed to assess harms, the extent to which the HPV vaccines' benefits outweigh their harms is unclear. Limited access to clinical study reports and trial data with case report forms prevented a thorough assessment. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42017056093. Our systematic review protocol was registered on PROSPERO in January 2017: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPEROFILES/56093_PROTOCOL_20170030.pdf. Two protocol amendments were registered on PROSPERO on November 2017: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPEROFILES/56093_PROTOCOL_20171116.pdf. Our index of the HPV vaccine studies was published in Systematic Reviews in January 2018: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0675-z. A description of the challenges obtaining the data was published in September 2018: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3694.

Indexed as

AlphapapillomavirusPapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesAdolescentAdultAgedChildFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaeYoung AdultPapillomavirus VaccinesHuman papillomavirus vaccineMeta-analysisRandomised clinical trial and Clinical study reportSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32106879
PMCPMC7047375
OpenAlexW3009964236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.