Cited by 272Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchGenital Health and DiseaseReproductive tract infections research

Vaccine efficacy against persistent human papillomavirus (HPV) 16/18 infection at 10 years after one, two, and three doses of quadrivalent HPV vaccine in girls in India: a multicentre, prospective, cohort study

Open access
Basu, Partha, Malvi, Sylla G, Joshi, Smita, Bhatla, Neerja, Muwonge, Richard, Lucas, Eric, Verma, Yogesh, Esmy, Pulikkottil O +23 more·2021·The Lancet Oncology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A randomised trial designed to compare three and two doses of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in adolescent girls in India was converted to a cohort study after suspension of HPV vaccination in trials by the Indian Government. In this Article, the revised aim of the cohort study was to compare vaccine efficacy of single dose to that of three and two doses in protecting against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection at 10 years post vaccination. METHODS: In the randomised trial, unmarried girls aged 10-18 years were recruited from nine centres across India and randomly assigned to either two doses or three doses of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Gardasil [Merck Sharp & Dohme, Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA]; 0·5 mL administered intramuscularly). After suspension of recruitment and vaccination, the study became a longitudinal, prospective cohort study by default, and participants were allocated to four cohorts on the basis of the number vaccine doses received per protocol: the two-dose cohort (received vaccine on days 1 and 180 or later), three-dose cohort (days 1, 60, and 180 or later), two-dose default cohort (days 1 and 60 or later), and the single-dose default cohort. Participants were followed up yearly. Cervical specimens were collected from participants 18 months after marriage or 6 months after first childbirth, whichever was earlier, to assess incident and persistent HPV infections. Married participants were screened for cervical cancer as they reached 25 years of age. Unvaccinated women age-matched to the married vaccinated participants were recruited to serve as controls. Vaccine efficacy against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infections (the primary endpoint) was analysed for single-dose recipients and compared with that in two-dose and three-dose recipients after adjusting for imbalance in the distribution of potential confounders between the unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN98283094, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00923702. FINDINGS: Vaccinated participants were recruited between Sept 1, 2009, and April 8, 2010 (date of vaccination suspension), and followed up over a median duration of 9·0 years (IQR 8·2-9·6). 4348 participants had three doses, 4980 had two doses (0 and 6 months), and 4949 had a single dose. Vaccine efficacy against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection among participants evaluable for the endpoint was 95·4% (95% CI 85·0-99·9) in the single-dose default cohort (2135 women assessed), 93·1% (77·3-99·8) in the two-dose cohort (1452 women assessed), and 93·3% (77·5-99·7) in three-dose recipients (1460 women assessed). INTERPRETATION: A single dose of HPV vaccine provides similar protection against persistent infection from HPV 16 and 18, the genotypes responsible for nearly 70% of cervical cancers, to that provided by two or three doses. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00453-8

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Single-dose HPV vaccination provides comparable or non-inferior efficacy against persistent HPV infection compared with multi-dose schedules, with lower but sustained antibody levels for at least 11 years after vaccination.

    “Notably, the IARC India trial with a quadrivalent vaccine, and the Costa Rica Trial with a bivalent vaccine, have shown comparable efficacy between single-dose and multi-dose schedules, with sustained antibody levels for at least 11 years after vaccination.”

    From Evidence-based impact projections of single-dose human papillomavirus vaccination in India: a modelling study (2022) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Discussion reports that one dose of the quadrivalent vaccine had efficacy against persistent HPV 16/18 infection no different from two or three doses through 10 years. It also says single-dose antibody concentrations remained sustained for at least a decade, but does not establish the claimed 11-year duration or that those levels were lower than after multiple doses. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The IARC India HPV vaccine trial currently provides the best data on single-dose protection because of its long follow-up and near-random assignment of participants to different dose schedules.

    “which currently provides the best data on single-dose protection because of its long follow-up and near-random assignment of participants to different dose schedules.10, 11”
  • Titles and abstracts of all retrieved records were independently screened by two reviewers using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria.

    “The titles and abstracts of all retrieved records were independently screened by two reviewers (KJ and RRD) using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria on the Rayyan web-based systematic review platform8.”

    From Barriers to HPV vaccination among adolescent girls in India: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Methods sections describe recruitment, HPV testing, and cervical cancer screening in a prospective cohort, not screening titles and abstracts of retrieved records. Searches for independent reviewer screening, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and Rayyan found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [15]International Agency for Research on Cancer/WHO Primary end-points for prophylactic HPV vaccine trials. IARC Working Group report vol 7 2014 IARC Lyon 26468561

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Basu, P., Malvi, S. G., Joshi, S., Bhatla, N., Muwonge, R., Lucas, E., Verma, Y., Esmy, P. O., Poli, U. R. R., Shah, A., Zomawia, E., Pimple, S., Jayant, K., Hingmire, S., Chiwate, A., Divate, U., Vashist, S., Mishra, G., Jadhav, R., Siddiqi, M., Sankaran, S., Prabhu, P. R., Kannan, T. P. R. A., Varghese, R., Shastri, S. S., Anantharaman, D., Gheit, T., Tommasino, M., Sauvaget, C., Pillai, M. R., & Sankaranarayanan, R.
Affiliations
  • Centre international de recherche sur le cancer (FR)
  • Nargis Dutt Memorial Cancer Hospital (IN)
  • Jehangir Hospital (IN)
  • All India Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
  • Sikkim Manipal University (IN)
  • Public Health Foundation of India (IN)
  • Gujarat Cancer & Research Institute (IN)
  • Homi Bhabha National Institute (IN)
  • Cancer Foundation of India (IN)
  • Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology (IN)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
  • RTI International (US)
Corresponding author
Basu, Partha
Venue
The Lancet Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-11
Volume
22
Issue
11
Pages
1518-1529
ISSN
1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3204615344
Cited by
272
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 9
FWCI
30.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2022-01-01)
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • World Health Organization
  • Centre International de Recherche sur le Cancer
  • Seventh Framework Programme (FP7-HEALTH-2011-282562)
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Genital Health and Disease
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
Keywords
human papillomavirus, HPV16, HPV 18, quadrivalent HPV vaccine, Gardasil, vaccine efficacy, persistent HPV infection, single-dose vaccination, two-dose vaccination, adolescent girls, cervical cancer prevention, cervical cancer screening, India, cervical cancer incidence
MeSH terms
Human Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine Quadrivalent, Types 6, 11, 16, 18, Adolescent, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Cervix Uteri, Child, Female, Humans, India, Longitudinal Studies, Prospective Studies, Vaccination, Papillomavirus Infections, Human papillomavirus 18, Human papillomavirus 16

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review