ArticleJournal of immunological methods2023
Development of a proficiency testing program for HPV serology assays used to evaluate antibody responses in vaccine trials.
Article in Journal of immunological methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and calibration of an HPV serology secondary standard for measuring antibody responses in HPV vaccine trials: a preliminary report.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Scientific approaches to defining HPV vaccine-induced protective immunity.International journal of cancer · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, a proficiency panel was created for evaluation of assay performance and inter- and intra-laboratory assay comparisons, especially the ability to accurately measure negative, low, intermediate, and high levels of HPV type-specific antibodies. Comprised of 80 deidentified samples, this panel is designed for individual labs to evaluate assay performance characteristics on a biennial basis, to promote standardization of methodology and harmonization of data from human papillomavirus (HPV) serology tests in vaccine trials. The proficiency panel was qualified using 2 types of assays (singleplex Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays [ELISAs] or Multiplex antibody-binding assays and Pseudovirion-based neutralization assays [PBNAs]) in 10 laboratories from 7 countries, monitoring HPV antibody responses for up to 9 HPV types and using 3 different analysis methods. Sensitivity, specificity, and correlations (concordance, accuracy, and precision) were evaluated for each HPV type. In laboratories that tested all 80 samples, results from most (74/80) samples were reported with 100% accuracy across all 9 HPV types. The average sensitivity and specificity for singleplex and multiplex antibody binding assays ranged from 86.7% to 98.3% (sensitivity) and 84.2% to 94.3% (specificity), while the average sensitivity and specificity for the Pseudovirion (PsV)-based neutralization assays (PBNA) ranged from 87.6% to 99.4% (sensitivity) and 52.4% to 94.4% (specificity). This proficiency panel will help with assessing performance characteristics of HPV serology assays used in clinical trial studies and assure the data generated from these assays is harmonized.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.