Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41740992›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2026

Extended follow-up of invasive cervical cancer risk after quadrivalent HPV vaccination: nationwide, register based study.

Shiqiang Wu, Yunyang Deng, Tiia Lepp, Lina Schollin Ask, Pär Sparen, Mark Clements, Joakim Dillner, Jiayao Lei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Vaccine prevention of HPV-associated diseases].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. How to evaluate and select cervical screening and triage tests in vaccinated populations.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Design with women in mind.Nature biomedical engineering · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Shiqiang WuDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden shiqiang.wu@ki.se.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6848-7714
Yunyang DengDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
Tiia LeppUnit for Vaccination Programmes, Department of Public Health Analysis and Data Management, Public Health Agency of Sweden, Solna, Sweden.
Lina Schollin AskUnit for Vaccination Programmes, Department of Public Health Analysis and Data Management, Public Health Agency of Sweden, Solna, Sweden.
Pär SparenDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
Mark ClementsDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
Joakim DillnerCentre for Cervical Cancer Elimination, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jiayao LeiDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the long term risk of invasive cervical cancer after receiving the quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, how risk varies by time since vaccination, and to assess the population level impact of HPV vaccination programmes.

designNationwide register based cohort study with up to 18 years of follow-up.

settingSweden, from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2023.

participants926​ 362 girls and women residing in Sweden between 2006 and 2023, born in 1985-88 (opportunistic cohort), 1989-92 (subsidised cohort), 1993-98 (catch-up cohort), or 1999-2001 (school based cohort), and with no previous HPV vaccination or diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer at the start of follow-up.

main outcome measuresIncidence rate ratios of invasive cervical cancer among vaccinated women versus unvaccinated women were estimated using Poisson regression, adjusting for age, calendar time, sociodemographic factors, and medical histories. Incidence rate ratios were further assessed by time since vaccination, stratified into three year intervals (eg, 1-3, 4-6 years), and by age at vaccination, as well as additional analyses by birth cohorts.

resultsDuring follow-up, 365​ 502 (39.5%) girls and women received at least one dose of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine. 930 cases of invasive cervical cancer were identified, including 97 in vaccinated and 833 cases in unvaccinated individuals. Among participants vaccinated before 17 years, the overall fully adjusted incidence rate ratios compared with the unvaccinated group was 0.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.32), with sustained protection for 13-15 years after vaccination (incidence rate ratio 0.23, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.46). For individuals vaccinated at 17 years or older, the overall fully adjusted incidence rate ratio was 0.63 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.81) compared with the unvaccinated group, with significant incidence reductions observed during years 10-12 (incidence rate ratio 0.54, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.86), and years 13-15 (incidence rate ratio 0.23, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.60) after vaccination. Compared with the opportunistic cohort, the school based cohort had a 72% (95% CI 11% to 91%) lower risk of cervical cancer after adjustment for covariates (incidence rate ratio 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.89).

conclusionsA significantly reduced risk of invasive cervical cancer following quadrivalent HPV vaccination persisted throughout long term follow-up, with no indication of waning protection. School based cohorts showed lower incidence of cervical cancer at the population level than the opportunistic cohort.

Identifiers

PMID41740992
PMCPMC12934514

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.