ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs2024
Population-level health impact of hypothetical waning 1-dose human papillomavirus vaccination and 2-dose mitigation strategies in a high cervical cancer burden setting.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adapting Sexual Behavior Survey Data to Parameterize an Agent-Based Model of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Transmission.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- Single-dose HPV vaccination in the United States - a multi-modeling analysis.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Ranking the most efficient human papillomavirus vaccination strategies in low-income and lower-middle income countries: a mathematical modelling analysis.The Lancet. Global health · 2025Article
- Population-level impact of switching to 1-dose human papillomavirus vaccination in high-income countries: examining uncertainties using mathematical modeling.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe simulated the impact of hypothetical waning scenarios of a 1-dose human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination paired with switching to 2-dose mitigation strategies guided by empirical vaccine trial reporting timelines.
methodsUsing 2 independent mathematical models fitted to a high-burden setting, we projected the cumulative cervical cancer cases averted over 85 years for alternative HPV vaccination scenarios under 2 program adoption timelines: 1) de novo introduction of a 1-dose HPV vaccination and 2) a switch from an existing 2-dose HPV vaccination program to a 1-dose vaccination. We assumed 80% vaccination coverage with the bivalent vaccine and an average duration of a 1-dose HPV vaccine protection of either 30 or 25 years with 100% efficacy. We varied the eligible age group(s) at program introduction and the 2-dose mitigation (single-age cohort or multi-age cohort). If needed for mitigation, reintroduction of 2-dose vaccination was assumed to occur in 2036 (ie, 30 years after initiation of the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial).
resultsUnder both vaccine adoption timelines, the models projected that countries could achieve the same level of health benefits by switching to 2 doses in 2036 using a multi-age cohort approach as with initiating a 2-dose or 1-dose vaccination program with no waning. With only a single-age cohort 2-dose mitigation approach, 98%-99% of cases would be prevented compared with the health benefits of 2 doses or a noninferior, durable 1 dose.
conclusionsCountries hesitant to adopt a 1-dose HPV vaccination program may have opportunities to leverage the benefits and efficiency of a 1-dose schedule while awaiting longer-term reporting from 1-dose durability studies, including Costa Rica Vaccine Trial.
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.