← All Vaccine Summaries Brought to you by the Open Source Medicine Foundation

Vaccine Evidence Summary

HPV Vaccine Side Effects (Human Papillomavirus — Database-Reported Reactions)

This page answers “hpv vaccine side effects” with sourced pharmacovigilance data — VAERS, VigiAccess, Lareb, and DAEN category breakdowns. Counts are database reports, not proven vaccine-caused injury rates.

Look up a vaccine lot or batch number in VAERS →

Last updated: July 2026  ·  Status: Current U.S. licensed product reviewed

ⓘ Methodology Note

This page summarizes published pre-licensure clinical trial data, post-licensure surveillance findings, and peer-reviewed epidemiological studies for HPV vaccines currently and historically licensed in the United States (Gardasil® was licensed in 2006 and withdrawn in 2016; Gardasil® 9, licensed in 2014, is the only HPV vaccine currently distributed in the U.S.; Cervarix® was licensed in 2009 and withdrawn in 2016 but remains available in other countries). Safety and efficacy data are presented without interpretive language that implies the vaccine is "safe" or "unsafe." Each section notes the quality and strength of the underlying evidence. Data are drawn from FDA review documents, published clinical trials, Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) analyses, VAERS summaries, Institute of Medicine / National Academies consensus reports, Cochrane systematic reviews, WHO GACVS statements, and peer-reviewed literature. Where findings are inconsistent or limited, those limitations are explicitly stated.

1. Basic Information

Diseases Protected Against

Human Papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection globally. There are more than 200 HPV genotypes, of which approximately 40 infect the anogenital tract. Persistent infection with high-risk (oncogenic) HPV types is a necessary cause of cervical cancer and is associated with a proportion of vulvar, vaginal, penile, anal, and oropharyngeal (throat) cancers. Low-risk HPV types (principally types 6 and 11) cause over 90% of anogenital warts and nearly all cases of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP).

HPV Types Associated Diseases Attributable Fraction
Types 16, 18 (high-risk) Cervical cancer (squamous cell and adenocarcinoma); anal, vulvar, vaginal, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers ~70% of cervical cancers; ~80–90% of HPV-related anal and oropharyngeal cancers
Types 31, 33, 45, 52, 58 (high-risk, additional) Cervical and other anogenital cancers ~15–20% of cervical cancers (cumulatively); covered by Gardasil 9
Types 6, 11 (low-risk) Anogenital warts; recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP) >90% of anogenital warts; near-100% of RRP

Source: IARC Monographs; CDC Pink Book (HPV chapter); Saraiya et al. (2015) J Natl Cancer Inst.

CDC Recommended Schedule (United States, 2025)

Population Schedule Notes
Routine (ages 9–14 years) 2-dose series: 0 and 6–12 months Minimum interval: 5 months between doses. If dose 2 is given <5 months after dose 1, a 3rd dose is needed.
Routine (ages 15–26 years) 3-dose series: 0, 1–2, and 6 months Recommended minimum intervals: 4 weeks between doses 1 & 2; 12 weeks between doses 2 & 3; 5 months between doses 1 & 3.
Catch-up (ages 27–45 years) 3-dose series: 0, 1–2, and 6 months Shared clinical decision-making. Not routinely recommended for all adults in this range; potential benefit is lower because most individuals have already been exposed to HPV.
Immunocompromised (including HIV) 3-dose series (including ages 9–14) 3 doses are recommended regardless of age at initiation.
History of sexual abuse or assault Initiate as early as age 9 ACIP recommends consideration of initiating the HPV vaccine series at age 9 for children with a history of sexual abuse.

Source: CDC ACIP, 2025 Child & Adolescent and Adult Immunization Schedules. Note: The U.S. schedule has evolved — universal vaccination was initially recommended for females (2006), extended to males (2011), and the age-9–14 2-dose schedule was adopted in 2016 following evidence of non-inferior immunogenicity.

Licensed Products (U.S.)

Documented Adverse Events (HRSA VICP)

The following adverse events are documented by the HRSA Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) as having a temporal relationship to this vaccine. These are not necessarily confirmed causal relationships, but rather conditions for which claims have been compensated or are presumed caused by the vaccine.

WHO Causality Assessment Methodology

The World Health Organization's Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) uses a 4-level causality classification:

  • Consistent: Epidemiological studies demonstrate a statistically significant association with temporal specificity and biological plausibility. Replicated across independent populations and study designs.
  • Indeterminate: Evidence exists but is insufficient to confirm or rule out causality. May be limited by sample size, confounding, or inconsistency across studies.
  • Inconsistent: Studies have not demonstrated a consistent or convincing association. Evidence against causality outweighs evidence for it.
  • Unclassifiable: Insufficient data to reach any conclusion. Requires further evidence.

Source: WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS), 2021–2025 causality review cycles. See also Institute of Medicine (IOM) Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality (2012) for pre-COVID vaccine assessments.

Condition Time Window Causality Level HRSA Description
Anaphylaxis 0-1 days Consistent
WHO Determination (2021, 2023): Consistent for all COVID-19 vaccines. Rate: ~2–5 per million doses. Temporal specificity (onset within minutes, consistent with IgE-mediated). Plausible biological mechanism: immediate hypersensitivity to vaccine excipients (PEG for mRNA, polysorbate for adenoviral). Verified via passive surveillance convergence across multiple national systems (VAERS, EudraVigilance, MHRA Yellow Card, TGA DAEN).
Biological Mechanism: Not thought to be spike protein mediated; likely polyethylene glycol (PEG) in mRNA vaccines triggers IgE-mediated mast cell degranulation
Clinical Evidence: (Kuder et al., 2021); Mechanism: (Risma et al., 2021)
Spike Protein Evidence: Not tested
Anaphylaxis occurring within 4 hours following vaccination
Syncope (Fainting) 0-1 days Indeterminate
WHO / IOM Causality Assessment: Evidence reviewed; causal association cannot be confirmed or excluded at current evidence level. Requires further epidemiological and mechanistic investigation. See HRSA VICP Table for program-specific determination.
Biological Mechanism: Multiple plausible biological mechanisms under investigation. Brighton Collaboration AESI monitoring ongoing.
Clinical Evidence: See HRSA VICP/CICP program documentation for current determination.
Spike Protein Evidence: Evidence reviewed; consult Brighton Collaboration list for mechanistic assessment status.
Syncope occurring within a few minutes to 2 hours after vaccination

Important Notes

  • HRSA VICP: Conditions listed are documented by HRSA as having temporal relationship to vaccination. Compensation does not imply causation.
  • Temporal Association: These conditions occurred after vaccination within the specified time window, but other factors may have contributed.
  • Rarity: Most adverse events are extremely rare. Serious adverse events from vaccines occur in roughly 1-2 per million doses.
  • Biological Plausibility: Mechanistic evidence is under review and will be integrated in Q3 2026.
  • Benefit-Risk: This page documents documented injuries. See disease burden pages for context on prevented diseases.

Ingredients (Package Insert)

Structured composition for 1 branded product covered on this page, taken from FDA-approved package inserts (DailyMed / manufacturer prescribing information). Lists are per product — formulations differ by manufacturer and presentation. Click an ingredient name to open its safety-context page when available.

Virus-like particle Intramuscular (IM) Adjuvant: Amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (AAHS) No preservative (typical single-dose) Virus-like particle (VLP) AAHS aluminum Polysorbate 80 Yeast protein
Gardasil 9 Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC · Virus-like particle

Delivery

Route: Intramuscular (IM)

Form: Suspension for injection

Dose volume: 0.5 mL

Presentation: single-dose vial or prefilled syringe

Encapsulation / delivery vehicle

Virus-like particle (VLP) — Recombinant L1 major capsid proteins self-assemble into non-infectious virus-like particles (no viral DNA).

Antigens

AntigenTypeAmount / dose
HPV Type 6 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈30 mcg
HPV Type 11 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈40 mcg
HPV Type 16 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈60 mcg
HPV Type 18 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈40 mcg
HPV Type 31 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈20 mcg
HPV Type 33 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈20 mcg
HPV Type 45 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈20 mcg
HPV Type 52 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈20 mcg
HPV Type 58 L1 protein
System: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
VLP≈20 mcg

Adjuvants

Preservatives

  • None — Single-dose presentation; label states no preservative.

Excipients & residuals

IngredientCategoryAmountRole
Sodium chlorideBuffer9.56 mgtonicity
L-histidineBuffer0.78 mgbuffer
Polysorbate 80Surfactant50 mcgsurfactant
Sodium borateBuffer35 mcgpH stabilizer
Yeast proteinResidual (culture)trace residual (<7 mcg/dose in related labeling)residual
Water for injectionDiluentq.s.vehicle

Source: FDA package insert · Verified 2026-07-09

ⓘ How to read this section

Ingredient lists are sourced from official package inserts for the specific brands named above. Formulations can change between lots and over time — verify against the current label before any clinical decision. Presence of a substance does not by itself indicate harm; toxicology is dose-, route-, and context-dependent. Browse the full ingredient database: Vaccine Ingredients index.

Causality assessment & potential mechanisms

Conditions below combine WHO-style causality levels with potential biological mechanisms from the site mechanism catalog (ae_mechanisms_catalog.json). HRSA VICP table listing (where shown) indicates a compensable temporal association under U.S. program rules — not automatic proof of causation for every case. Mechanisms are hypothesis-level pathways with graded evidence.

Condition Time window Causality Potential mechanism(s)
Anaphylaxis HRSA table 0–1 days Very likely / Probable

Evidence: High

IgE-mediated hypersensitivity (anaphylaxis) (primary · hypersensitivity)

Pre-existing or newly formed IgE against vaccine antigens or excipients (e.g., gelatin, egg proteins, PEG, polysorbate) triggers mast-cell and basophil degranulation with systemic mediator release.

Syncope HRSA table 0–1 days Possible

Evidence: Moderate

Vasovagal (needle) syncope (primary · vasovagal)

Pain, anxiety, or orthostatic stress from injection triggers parasympathetic surge with bradycardia and hypotension, producing transient loss of consciousness—common in adolescents.

SIRVA 0–2 days Very likely / Probable

Evidence: High

SIRVA — incorrect injection into shoulder structures (primary · procedural)

Needle placement into the subdeltoid/subacromial bursa or joint rather than deltoid muscle causes prolonged local inflammation and restricted range of motion (procedural, not antigen-specific).

Framework: WHO causality + HRSA VICP (where applicable) + AE mechanism catalog. Last updated: 2026-07-18. Schema: schemas/vaccine_injury_table.schema.json · Mechanisms: schemas/ae_mechanism.schema.json. Not medical or legal advice.

2. Pre-Licensure Clinical Trial Data

Licensure trial design (ICAN / OpenVAERS)

The table below reproduces ICAN’s No Placebo Table rows for U.S. childhood-schedule products relevant to this page — including the control/comparator used in FDA licensing trials (not always saline placebo). OSMF presents this for transparency; it is not an endorsement of ICAN interpretations.

Vaccine Brand Manufacturer Doses (schedule) Ages injected Control / comparator Placebo Safety review window
HPVGardasil 9Merck2 or 39Y 9 ½YGardasil 4 (see note)No1 month in five trials, 6 months in one trial, and 4 years in one trial

Source: OpenVAERS — No Placebo Table · ICAN original PDF · Attribution: Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) via OpenVAERS · Last fetched: 2026-07-16. For many trials listing '6 months' safety review, ICAN notes review was typically ~30 days post-injection with a phone call at 6 months.

Gardasil® (Quadrivalent) — Pivotal Trials (Licensed 2006)

Gardasil was evaluated in four placebo-controlled Phase 2 and Phase 3 trials (FUTURE I, FUTURE II, and two immunogenicity bridging studies). The combined safety population included approximately ~21,500 participants who received at least one dose of Gardasil (females aged 9–45; males aged 9–26). ~13,700 received Gardasil in the placebo-controlled efficacy populations. The pivotal trials used an aluminum-adjuvant-containing placebo (AAHS) rather than saline. This was intended to preserve blinding given the vaccine's high reactogenicity, but the FDA noted that this design choice may reduce the ability to detect adjuvant-attributable adverse events.

Metric Data (Gardasil Quadrivalent) Evidence Strength
Total participants (safety population) ~21,500 (Gardasil); ~12,800 placebo/active comparator Strong Large by vaccine trial standards
Duration of safety follow-up Median ~3–4 years; subset followed for up to 14 years in Nordic extension studies Strong
Efficacy (cervical CIN2/3+ caused by HPV 16/18) ~98% (per-protocol population) Strong
Efficacy (genital warts, HPV 6/11) ~99% (per-protocol) Strong

Gardasil® 9 (9-valent) — Pivotal Trial for U.S. Licensure (2014)

Gardasil 9 was evaluated in a single pivotal Phase 3 trial (Protocol V503-001) that compared Gardasil 9 to Gardasil quadrivalent. A total of ~14,215 participants received at least one dose of Gardasil 9 (females aged 16–26) and ~7,100 received Gardasil quadrivalent. Additional immunogenicity bridging studies were conducted in males, younger children (ages 9–15), and older women.

Most Common Adverse Reactions (Pre-Licensure Trials)

Reaction Gardasil 9 (Approx.) Gardasil Quadrivalent (Approx.) Placebo (AAHS-containing) (Approx.)
Injection site pain ~85–92% ~83% ~75–77%
Injection site swelling ~35–45% ~25% ~16%
Injection site erythema ~30–40% ~25% ~18%
Headache ~12–15% ~12–14% ~11%
Fever ≥ 37.8°C (100°F) ~6–10% ~10% ~10%
Fatigue ~10–13% ~10–12% ~10%
Nausea ~4–7% ~4–6% ~4%
Dizziness ~3–5% ~3–4% ~3%
Syncope (fainting) ~0.1% (reported in trials) ~0.1% ~0.1%

Sources: Gardasil 9 and Gardasil prescribing information; FDA clinical review documents. Note: The high rate of injection site pain (>80%) is characteristic of this vaccine. The placebo used contained the same aluminum adjuvant (AAHS), so the incremental reactogenicity attributable to the VLPs specifically is more modest than the absolute rates. Syncope occurred at similar rates across groups; the association is with the injection procedure (vasovagal response) rather than vaccine content.

Key Limitations of Pre-Licensure Trial Data

3. Post-Licensure Safety Data

Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)

The VSD has conducted active surveillance on HPV vaccine safety since 2006. The population under surveillance includes approximately 9–10 million people annually (~3% of the U.S. population). VSD uses rapid cycle analyses (near-real-time surveillance) and retrospective cohort and self-controlled case series designs.

Sources: Gee et al. (2023); Naleway et al. (2018, 2022); Yih et al. (2016); Klein et al. (VSD annual surveillance).

VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System)

VAERS is a passive (spontaneous) reporting system co-managed by the CDC and FDA. VAERS cannot establish causation. HPV vaccine safety data span nearly 20 years. The HPV vaccine has been the subject of substantial public attention, which can influence VAERS reporting patterns through stimulated/heightened reporting.

VAERS Metric (HPV, cumulative U.S. data) Approximate Figures
Total U.S. doses distributed (estimated, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, 2006–2024) >135 million doses in the U.S.; >270 million doses globally
Total VAERS reports received for HPV vaccines ~60,000–70,000 (cumulative)
Reports classified as "serious" (per CFR 600.80 criteria) ~7–10% of total HPV reports
Most commonly reported adverse events Syncope, dizziness, injection site reactions, headache, nausea, fever, fatigue
Notable reporting pattern A cluster of reports describing post-vaccination chronic pain syndromes, autonomic dysfunction (including POTS — postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome), and chronic fatigue has been observed in VAERS and stimulated by advocacy groups. These conditions have been studied in VSD and European registry studies; controlled epidemiological studies have not confirmed a causal association.

⚠ Critical Caveat

VAERS data represent unverified reports of events temporally associated with vaccination. A report to VAERS does not mean the vaccine caused the event. VAERS is designed to generate hypotheses and detect potential safety signals; it cannot calculate incidence rates or establish causality. The HPV vaccine has been the subject of organized advocacy and high-profile media coverage, which can generate stimulated reporting — a phenomenon where publicity about a potential adverse event leads to increased reporting of that event beyond baseline. This makes raw VAERS report counts for HPV particularly unreliable for causal inference.

Major Independent Post-Licensure Reviews

Review / Institution Year(s) Design & Scope Key Finding
Institute of Medicine (IOM) — "Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality" 2012 Systematic review of >12,000 peer-reviewed articles; evaluated HPV vaccine for multiple adverse events Favors acceptance of causal relationship for anaphylaxis. Favors rejection of causality for autoimmune diseases, GBS, MS, stroke, and VTE. Evidence inadequate for several other outcomes. Noted the evidence base for HPV was limited at the time (~5 years post-licensure).
Cochrane Systematic Review — "HPV Vaccines" (Arbyn et al.) 2018 Meta-analysis of 26 RCTs (N=73,428) plus post-licensure observational studies HPV vaccines effective in preventing cervical precancer in adolescent girls and young women (15–26). No increased risk of serious adverse events, miscarriage, or stillbirth. Noted limitations in assessing very rare adverse events.
WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) 2013–2023, multiple reviews Ongoing review of global safety data from multiple countries and systems No evidence of causal association between HPV vaccination and autoimmune diseases, POTS, CRPS, POI, or chronic fatigue syndrome. Syncope and anaphylaxis are rare adverse events. GACVS has repeatedly affirmed the safety profile.
European Medicines Agency (EMA) — HPV Vaccine Safety Review 2015 Comprehensive review triggered by concerns about CRPS and POTS reports No evidence of causal association between HPV vaccines and CRPS or POTS. Reviewed all available data from clinical trials, post-marketing surveillance, and published literature.
Japan MHLW — HPV Vaccine Safety Review 2013–2022 Review following suspension of proactive recommendation (2013–2021) Japan suspended proactive government recommendation for HPV vaccination in June 2013 following media reports of post-vaccination symptoms. Multiple epidemiological investigations during the suspension, including the Nagoya City study (Suzuki & Hosono, 2018; N=29,846), found no difference in symptom prevalence between vaccinated and unvaccinated girls. Japan resumed proactive recommendation in November 2021.

The Japan HPV Vaccine Suspension (2013–2021)

Japan's experience is a significant case study in vaccine safety signal management. After media reports described girls developing chronic pain, motor impairment, and other symptoms temporally associated with HPV vaccination, Japan's MHLW suspended proactive government recommendation in June 2013. The vaccine remained available and on the national schedule, but without active government endorsement. Key findings from the suspension period:

Japan resumed proactive recommendation in November 2021 after an 8.5-year suspension. Modelling studies published in The Lancet Public Health (Simms et al., 2020) estimate that the suspension may result in thousands of preventable cervical cancer cases and deaths in Japan. This episode is noted because it represents the most significant regulatory action related to HPV vaccine safety in a high-income country and remains frequently cited in discussions of HPV vaccine safety.

Confirmed Safety Signals Identified in Post-Licensure Data

Note: Safety "signals" identified through post-licensure surveillance require further analytical epidemiological studies to confirm or refute causality. Signals may later be determined to be coincidental.

VAERS Reporting Data — Halma & Varon (2025), DARE-SAFE

The DARE-SAFE paper (Halma & Varon, Pharmacoepidemiology 2025, CC BY 4.0) analyzed VAERS reports for vaccines administered in the United States from 2006–2022. The following data are extracted from Table 1 of that paper for this vaccine (HPV (all HPV vaccine products combined; Gardasil/Gardasil 9/Cervarix)):

MetricValue
U.S. doses administered (2006–2022)158,878,541
Total VAERS AE reports42,464
AE reporting rate (per 100,000 doses)26.7
Total death reports109
Death reporting rate (per 100,000 doses)0.0686
AE-to-Death ratio390:1

Source: Halma, M.; Varon, J. DARE-SAFE. Pharmacoepidemiology. 2025. DOI: 10.3390/pharma4020007. CC BY 4.0. Data from Table 1.

📚 Important Interpretive Caveats (from the paper itself)

  • Reporting rate ≠ incidence rate. VAERS is a passive, unverified system. A report means someone submitted a claim of temporal association, not a confirmed causal event. The paper is explicit that causality cannot be inferred from these numbers alone.
  • Reporting behavior is not uniform. More serious, unusual, or media-salient events are reported at much higher rates than mild ones. Products receiving more public, media, legal, and clinical attention (particularly COVID-19 vaccines, which also benefited from V-safe active-surveillance prompts and CICP compensation pathways) generate more reports per dose regardless of true risk.
  • Age and comorbidity confounding is not adjusted. COVID-19 vaccines were disproportionately administered to elderly and comorbid populations (nursing homes, 65+, high-risk groups in early 2021) with much higher background all-cause mortality than the general child/working-age population. Some fraction of temporally-associated deaths would occur regardless of vaccination, and the paper does not perform a background-rate comparison.
  • Stimulated reporting is a known, documented phenomenon. Media coverage, plaintiff attorney solicitation, and advocacy campaigns — all independently inflate VAERS reporting propensity. The paper cites this literature but does not correct for it.
  • Small-denominator rows are unreliable. Rates computed from small denominators (e.g., monovalent measles, DT, mumps, rubella) have enormous statistical uncertainty and should not be compared to vaccines with hundreds of millions of administered doses without noting the wide confidence intervals.

Source: Halma, M.; Varon, J. DARE-SAFE: Denominator-Adjusted Rate Estimates of Substance Adverse Events Frequency Evaluation in Pharmaceuticals and Vaccines. Pharmacoepidemiology. 2025, 4, 7. DOI: 10.3390/pharma4020007. CC BY 4.0.

Passive Surveillance: AE Type Breakdown (Multi-System)

Side-by-side view of U.S. VAERS, Health Canada Canada Vigilance, Japan JADER (PMDA), EU EudraVigilance, and live-scraped international systems via SurVigilance (VigiAccess, Lareb, DAEN, DMA, Medsafe). SurVigilance panels show MedDRA PT mention totals (not individual-case counts). Category assignment uses keyword matching — approximate, not official SOC coding. VAERS ZIP CAPTCHA downloads use this site’s vaers_pipeline.py; FAERS is bulk quarterly ZIP via SurVigilance (not product search).

VAERS (United States)

Canada Vigilance (Canada)

JADER (PMDA, Japan)

EudraVigilance (EU)

16,427
individual cases · adrreports.eu DAP export (up to 28/06/2026)
Reaction SOC breakdown not included in this workbook export.

SurVigilance: VigiAccess · Lareb · DAEN · DMA · Medsafe

VigiAccess (WHO)

Lareb (Netherlands)

DAEN (Australia)

No DAEN (Australia) data yet — run python scrape_survigilance_one.py daen <vaccine-id> or python survigilance_pipeline.py --system daen (SurVigilance + direct scrapers: GitHub).

DMA (Denmark)

Denmark DMA interactive ADR search is currently offline (Danish Medicines Agency IT transition; public overviews frozen at 12 Mar 2024). Live product PT tables cannot be retrieved until DKMA restores the search. See DKMA notice. Denmark continues to report into EU EudraVigilance (panel above).

Medsafe (New Zealand)

VAERS (U.S., 2006–2024): 168,162 symptom mentions (26.46/100k doses). Largest share: Other / Unclassified (36%), Neurological (16%), General / Systemic (non-local) (11%). Canada Vigilance (CV Online extract): 1,482 reaction mentions in 361 unique reports (79.8% serious (288 of 361 reports)). Largest share: Neurological (19%), General / Systemic (non-local) (12%), Gastrointestinal (7%). JADER (PMDA public CSV extract): 13,421 reaction mentions in 3,198 unique reports (1.1% serious (35 of 3,198 reports)). Largest share: Neurological (31%), Other / Unclassified (30%), General / Systemic (non-local) (12%). EudraVigilance (EU DAP export): 16,427 individual cases (up to 28/06/2026). Reaction SOC categories were not exported in the local DAP workbooks — case count only. VigiAccess (WHO): 40,998 reaction-term mentions · search: HPV. Largest share: Dermatological (non-injection-site) (39%), Allergic / Anaphylactic (17%), Gastrointestinal (11%). Lareb (Netherlands): 10,204 reaction-term mentions · search: HPV vaccine. Largest share: General / Systemic (non-local) (30%), Musculoskeletal (15%), Gastrointestinal (14%). Medsafe (New Zealand): 2,560 reaction-term mentions · search: HPV. Largest share: Gastrointestinal (32%), Injection-site / Local reaction (26%), General / Systemic (non-local) (25%). Cross-database note: All systems are passive and unverified; reporting rates are not directly comparable across countries (different populations, reporting incentives, and lack of dose denominators for Canada/Japan/EU). top VAERS: Other / Unclassified; top Canada Vigilance: Neurological; top JADER: Neurological. SurVigilance note: VigiAccess, Lareb, DAEN, DMA, and Medsafe counts are live-scraped MedDRA PT mention totals (not deduplicated individual cases). Data via SurVigilance (GPL-3.0; pip install SurVigilance). Category assignment uses keyword matching on reported reaction terms — approximate and exploratory. Neither database establishes causality.

Compare AE patterns across all vaccines →

Pharmacovigilance Lot Signal Detection — Hypothesis-Generating Only

Multi-system context below. VAERS (U.S.) supports lot-level volume z-scores and seriousness flags by product and lot (2006–2024). Each lot links to a summary with report count, seriousness %, adverse-event pie chart, U.S. state map, and timeline. A signal flag means a statistical threshold was exceeded — not that a lot is unsafe. Full dashboard →

VAERS flags: VOL high report volume (z ≥ 3) · BURST clustered in <90 days · SER serious reports >50%. Lot numbers are voluntary/incomplete in VAERS. Location data is U.S. state only (no postal codes in the public extract).

VAERS (United States) — all lots by product

22,099 reports with usable lot across 825 lots · 124 flagged

Loading lot tables…

Other Pharmacovigilance Systems

Lot-level analysis is only possible where reporters supply batch/lot numbers in the public extract. Canada Vigilance, JADER (PMDA, Japan), and most other national systems publish product-level spontaneous reports without lot fields.

Canada Vigilance (Health Canada)

361 unique reports · 1,482 reaction mentions · 79.8% serious (288 of 361 reports). Top categories: Neurological (19%), General / Systemic (non-local) (12%), Gastrointestinal (7%).

Canada Vigilance spontaneous reports are unverified temporal associations. The public CV Online data extract does not include lot or batch numbers, so lot-level signal detection is not possible for this system — only product-level reaction patterns are shown here. No Canadian dose denominators are available. Extract 2026-03-31.

Search Canada Vigilance →

JADER (PMDA, Japan)

3,198 unique reports · 13,421 reaction mentions · 1.1% serious (35 of 3,198 reports). Top categories: Neurological (31%), Other / Unclassified (30%), General / Systemic (non-local) (12%).

JADER (Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report database) spontaneous reports are unverified temporal associations; PMDA has not assessed causality per case. The public CSV extract does not include lot or batch numbers, so lot-level signal detection is not possible — only product-level reaction patterns are shown here. Reaction terms in source data use MedDRA/J Preferred Terms. JADER CSV extract pmdacasereport202606 (2026-06). JADER reference (PDF)

Search JADER / PMDA adverse reactions →

EudraVigilance (EU)

16,427 individual cases (up to 28/06/2026) · HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS VACCINE [TYPES 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, 58] (RECOMBINANT, ADSORBED). Reaction SOC breakdown not included in this DAP export.

EudraVigilance spontaneous reports are unverified temporal associations. The local EudraVigilance DAP workbooks provide individual-case counts from adrreports.eu; exported Reaction SOC filters were not set, so reaction-category charts are unavailable from this extract. Lot/batch numbers are not in public line listings.

Search EudraVigilance →

VigiAccess (WHO)

40,998 MedDRA PT mentions · search: HPV. Top categories: Dermatological (non-injection-site) (39%), Allergic / Anaphylactic (17%), Gastrointestinal (11%).

Live-scraped public portal data via SurVigilance (GPL-3.0). Counts are reaction-term mentions, not deduplicated individual cases. No lot/batch field.

Search VigiAccess (WHO) →

Lareb (Netherlands)

10,204 MedDRA PT mentions · search: HPV vaccine. Top categories: General / Systemic (non-local) (30%), Musculoskeletal (15%), Gastrointestinal (14%).

Live-scraped public portal data via SurVigilance (GPL-3.0). Counts are reaction-term mentions, not deduplicated individual cases. No lot/batch field.

Search Lareb (Netherlands) →

SystemRegionLot data
VAERSUnited StatesLot data
Canada VigilanceCanadaNo public lot field
JADER (PMDA, Japan)JapanNo public lot field
Lareb (Netherlands)NetherlandsNo public lot field
EudraVigilanceEuropean UnionNo public lot field
VigiAccess (WHO)GlobalNo public lot field
Yellow Card (UK)United KingdomNo public lot field
DAEN (Australia)AustraliaNo public lot field

All global data sources → · Data schemas →

Active Pharmacovigilance (Defined-Population Surveillance)

Curated findings for HPV vaccine (Gardasil 9) from active systems (not VAERS). Page inventory last reviewed: 2026-07-10.

ⓘ Active vs. passive — why this pane is separate

The VAERS / multi-system charts above are passive surveillance: spontaneous, unverified reports without a fixed denominator. Active surveillance starts from a defined, enumerated population (EHR/claims or structured post-vaccination surveys), applies pre-specified statistical tests, and asks whether an outcome occurs more often than expected in a risk window versus a comparison window or group. These are not two flavors of the same evidence — active findings are the harder tier that can confirm, refute, or leave under investigation a signal first hinted in passive data. Do not add VAERS report counts to active incidence rates.

○ No signal detected ◐ Signal under investigation ◑ Investigated — not confirmed ● Signal confirmed (true association) – Not currently under active surveillance

CDC Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)

Outcome: Pre-specified serious outcomes (including autoimmune and neurological endpoints used in RCA protocols)

Tier 2 ○ No signal detected

VSD rapid-cycle and related active studies have provided ongoing safety monitoring for HPV vaccines. Large-scale evaluations have not confirmed causal associations for hypothesized autoimmune clusters that generated public concern; syncope remains a known procedural risk addressed by observation-after-vaccination guidance.

Population

Adolescents and young adults receiving HPV vaccine at VSD sites

Risk interval

Protocol-specific RCA windows post-dose

Comparison

Concurrent comparators / control intervals

Evaluation period

Post-licensure (quadrivalent and 9-valent eras)

Method

Rapid Cycle Analysis and observational studies

Sources: CDC VSD · CDC HPV vaccine safety

Record last reviewed: 2026-07-10

Update cadence: Tier 1: check AusVaxSafety monthly when public pages update. Tier 2/3: quarterly review around ACIP meetings and PubMed/MMWR; set lastReviewed per record. Source tiers: Tier 1 = public near-real-time dashboards (e.g. AusVaxSafety); Tier 2 = VSD / Sentinel / PRAC-type findings released via ACIP slides, MMWR, or papers (no public VSD raw dashboard); Tier 3 = regulator label/safety communications. Detecting a signal and later classifying it as not confirmed is normal system behavior — not an anomaly to hide or amplify.

4. Documented Adverse Events — Evidence of Association

Rank-aggregated VAERS signal detection (rankv)

The table below lists vaccine–event pairs that were detected as disproportionality signals by all four base methods used in rankv (GPS, PRR, ROR, BCPNN) on multi-decade VAERS data, then ordered by rank aggregation (Borda average rank; related to the Spearman/GA top-list approach in the rankv paper).

Agg. rank VAERS product Preferred term (event) N Method ranks (GPS / PRR / ROR / BCPNN)
22 HPV (GARDASIL 9) Interchange of vaccine products
clinical-coded PT
123 GPS rank 100 (EBGM=15.87); PRR rank 28 (PRR=183.3979); ROR rank 29 (ROR=184.2583); BCPNN rank 14 (IC_LB=5.2445)
24 HPV (GARDASIL) Smear cervix abnormal
clinical-coded PT · published top-25
388 GPS rank 134 (EBGM=9.11); PRR rank 10 (PRR=319.9405); ROR rank 10 (ROR=321.1733); BCPNN rank 28 (IC_LB=4.6371)
34 HPV (GARDASIL) Papilloma viral infection
clinical-coded PT
244 GPS rank 144 (EBGM=8.51); PRR rank 12 (PRR=309.538); ROR rank 12 (ROR=310.2869); BCPNN rank 37 (IC_LB=4.5209)
35 HPV (GARDASIL) Human papilloma virus test positive
clinical-coded PT · published top-25
228 GPS rank 147 (EBGM=8.5); PRR rank 11 (PRR=326.9674); ROR rank 11 (ROR=327.7067); BCPNN rank 38 (IC_LB=4.5073)
47 HPV (GARDASIL) Cervical dysplasia
clinical-coded PT · published top-25
127 GPS rank 158 (EBGM=8.3); PRR rank 16 (PRR=349.076); ROR rank 16 (ROR=349.5152); BCPNN rank 50 (IC_LB=4.2969)
71 HPV (GARDASIL) Colposcopy
clinical-coded PT · published top-25
45 GPS rank 197 (EBGM=8.29); PRR rank 17 (PRR=742.13); ROR rank 17 (ROR=742.4611); BCPNN rank 111 (IC_LB=3.6658)
80 HPV (GARDASIL) Anogenital warts
clinical-coded PT
98 GPS rank 178 (EBGM=7.9); PRR rank 57 (PRR=115.4424); ROR rank 57 (ROR=115.5539); BCPNN rank 69 (IC_LB=4.0037)
96 HPV (GARDASIL) Abortion induced
clinical-coded PT
118 GPS rank 249 (EBGM=6.51); PRR rank 65 (PRR=90.513); ROR rank 65 (ROR=90.618); BCPNN rank 65 (IC_LB=4.0232)
99 HPV (GARDASIL) Smear cervix
clinical-coded PT
52 GPS rank 239 (EBGM=7.32); PRR rank 50 (PRR=155.9223); ROR rank 51 (ROR=156.0023); BCPNN rank 108 (IC_LB=3.6703)
100 HPV (GARDASIL) Urine human chorionic gonadotropin positive
clinical-coded PT
180 GPS rank 237 (EBGM=6.56); PRR rank 76 (PRR=67.4664); ROR rank 76 (ROR=67.5853); BCPNN rank 62 (IC_LB=4.0699)
124 HPV (GARDASIL) Smear cervix normal
clinical-coded PT
36 GPS rank 266 (EBGM=7.2); PRR rank 58 (PRR=169.6297); ROR rank 58 (ROR=169.69); BCPNN rank 154 (IC_LB=3.3732)
147 HPV (GARDASIL) Alpha 1 foetoprotein normal
clinical-coded PT
94 GPS rank 256 (EBGM=6.52); PRR rank 112 (PRR=44.2922); ROR rank 112 (ROR=44.3326); BCPNN rank 112 (IC_LB=3.6518)
157 HPV (GARDASIL) Drug exposure during pregnancy
clinical-coded PT
1229 GPS rank 257 (EBGM=5.75); PRR rank 135 (PRR=25.4309); ROR rank 135 (ROR=25.7325); BCPNN rank 93 (IC_LB=3.7731)
165 HPV (GARDASIL) Pregnancy test positive
clinical-coded PT
357 GPS rank 272 (EBGM=5.84); PRR rank 138 (PRR=26.701); ROR rank 138 (ROR=26.7924); BCPNN rank 105 (IC_LB=3.6872)
168 HPV (GARDASIL) Caesarean section
clinical-coded PT
155 GPS rank 283 (EBGM=5.97); PRR rank 132 (PRR=32.1538); ROR rank 133 (ROR=32.2018); BCPNN rank 115 (IC_LB=3.6455)

Showing up to 15 pairs for this page (clinical-coded terms listed first). Full processed tables: rankv_signals.json.

  • Methods combined: BCPNN (IC), GPS/EBGM, PRR, ROR — then rank aggregation.
  • Data: ~30 years of public VAERS (rankv processed tables).
  • Origin: precisionFDA “Gaining New Insights by Detecting Adverse Event Anomalies” challenge solution.
  • Caveat: Disproportionality signals are statistical associations in spontaneous reports. They do not establish causality, incidence, or product defect. Many top pairs reflect administration/product-use coding rather than clinical injury.

Source: nanx.me/rankv · Code: github.com/nanxstats/rankv (MIT) · Built: 2026-07-30.

▶ Adverse Events with Strong Evidence of Causal Association

Criteria: Consistent epidemiological data from multiple independent studies, supported by mechanistic plausibility, and reviewed by IOM / WHO GACVS or equivalent authoritative body.

▶ Adverse Events with Moderate or Preliminary Evidence

Criteria: Some epidemiological evidence consistent with a signal, but data are limited by sample size, inconsistent findings across studies, or insufficient mechanistic evidence.

▶ Published Evidence Does Not Support a Causal Association

Criteria: Multiple large, well-controlled epidemiological studies have consistently failed to find an association; IOM / GACVS has rejected a causal relationship; or the preponderance of high-quality evidence is against an association.

5. Disease Prevention Benefits

5a. Pre-Vaccine vs. Post-Vaccine Era Data (United States)

Because HPV vaccination was introduced relatively recently (2006), long-term cancer incidence data in vaccinated cohorts are still emerging. However, early indicators of impact are available from multiple countries with established vaccination programs.

Outcome Pre-Vaccine Era Post-Vaccine Era (U.S. and comparable countries)
HPV prevalence (vaccine types 6/11/16/18) in U.S. females aged 14–19 ~11.5% (2003–2006, NHANES) ~1.1% (2013–2016, NHANES) — ~90% reduction in vaccine-type prevalence in sexually experienced females
HPV prevalence (vaccine types) in U.S. females aged 20–24 ~18.5% (2003–2006) ~5.3% (2015–2018) — ~71% reduction
Cervical precancer (CIN2+) incidence — Australia ~20 per 100,000 (pre-vaccination baseline, women <20) ~3 per 100,000 (2014, women <20) — ~85% reduction in the most vaccinated age cohorts
Genital warts incidence — Australia ~5% of sexual health clinic attendees <21 (pre-2007) Near-elimination (<0.5%) in vaccinated age cohorts by 2015
Genital warts — U.S. (private insurance claims, females aged 15–19) ~2.5 per 1,000 person-years (2006) ~0.5 per 1,000 person-years (2014) — ~80% decline
Invasive cervical cancer — Sweden (registry data) Swedish registry study (Lei et al., 2020; N=1.7 million women aged 10–30): cervical cancer incidence rate of vaccinated women was 47 per 100,000 person-years vs. 94 per 100,000 in unvaccinated women (49% reduction). Women vaccinated before age 17 had an 88% lower incidence.
Invasive cervical cancer — England (registry data) Falcaro et al. (2021, The Lancet; N=13.7 million years of follow-up): cervical cancer rates were 87% lower in women vaccinated at age 12–13 compared to unvaccinated; 62% lower at age 14–16; 34% lower at age 16–18.

Sources: NHANES (CDC); Brotherton et al. (Australia); Lei et al. (2020, N Engl J Med); Falcaro et al. (2021, The Lancet).

5b. Current Disease Burden (United States)

5c. Real-World Effectiveness Data

Sources: Palmer et al. (2019) BMJ; Kjaer et al. (2021); CDC National Immunization Survey — Teen (NIS-Teen, 2023).

Disease Burden Over Time

Reported U.S. disease burden by year. The dashed vertical line marks vaccine introduction. Hover or tap data points for values; use arrow keys when a chart has focus.

ⓘ About these charts: These are accessible SVG line charts with keyboard navigation, hover tooltips, and an underlying data table (expand below). The dashed vertical line marks the year of vaccine introduction. Reported cases undercount true incidence; case definitions, reporting practices, and diagnostic methods have changed over time. See Section 5 for additional context and pre-vs-post era comparisons.

7. International Surveillance & Global Data

Quick links to public pharmacovigilance databases and trial registries relevant to HPV Vaccine. Reporting counts do not establish causality.

8. Curated Adverse Event Literature

Curated peer-reviewed literature linking specific adverse events to HPV Vaccine. Each entry is a case report, case series, or related safety publication identified via PubMed. Expand Search PubMed for additional literature below to run custom queries.

9. Key References

References are organised by category. Links are provided to the original source where available.

Pre-Licensure Trials / FDA Review Documents

  1. Merck & Co., Inc. Gardasil® 9 (Human Papillomavirus 9-valent Vaccine, Recombinant) — Prescribing Information. merck.com
  2. Joura EA, Giuliano AR, Iversen OE, et al. A 9-valent HPV vaccine against infection and intraepithelial neoplasia in women. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(8):711–723. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1405044
  3. Garland SM, Hernandez-Avila M, Wheeler CM, et al. Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent anogenital diseases. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(19):1928–1943. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa061760
  4. FDA. Clinical Review — Gardasil 9 (BLA 125508), 2014. fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/gardasil-9

Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses

  1. Arbyn M, Xu L, Simoens C, Martin-Hirsch PP. Prophylactic vaccination against human papillomaviruses to prevent cervical cancer and its precursors. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;5(5):CD009069. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009069.pub3
  2. Drolet M, Bénard E, Pérez N, et al. Population-level impact and herd effects following the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet. 2019;394(10197):497–509. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30298-3

Institute of Medicine / GACVS Reports

  1. Institute of Medicine. Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012. nationalacademies.org
  2. WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS). Safety of HPV vaccines — multiple statements (2013–2023). who.int
  3. European Medicines Agency. HPV vaccines: EMA confirms evidence does not support that they cause CRPS or POTS. November 2015. ema.europa.eu

Major Post-Licensure Safety Studies

  1. Gee J, Weinbaum C, Sukumaran L, Markowitz LE. Quadrivalent HPV vaccine safety review and safety monitoring for nine-valent HPV vaccine in the United States. Pediatrics. 2023 (comprehensive VSD safety study, >1.2 million doses, 16 autoimmune outcomes).
  2. Naleway AL, Mittendorf KF, Irving SA, et al. Primary ovarian insufficiency and adolescent vaccination. Pediatrics. 2018;142(3):e20180943. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2018-0943
  3. Scheller NM, Svanström H, Pasternak B, et al. Quadrivalent HPV vaccination and risk of multiple sclerosis and other demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system. JAMA. 2015;313(1):54–61. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.16946
  4. Hviid A, Thorsen NM, Frisch M, et al. Human papillomavirus vaccination and risk of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome. Clin Infect Dis. 2021 (Danish registry, >1.3 million females; HR 0.86 for POTS). DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab855
  5. Feiring B, Laake I, Bakken IJ, et al. HPV vaccination and risk of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis. Vaccine. 2017;35(33):4203–4210. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.06.040
  6. Scheller NM, Pasternak B, Mølgaard-Nielsen D, et al. Quadrivalent HPV vaccination and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(13):1223–1233. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1612296

Real-World Effectiveness & Disease Burden

  1. Lei J, Ploner A, Elfström KM, et al. HPV vaccination and the risk of invasive cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(14):1340–1348. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1917338
  2. Falcaro M, Castañon A, Ndlela B, et al. The effects of the national HPV vaccination programme in England, UK, on cervical cancer and grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia incidence: a register-based observational study. The Lancet. 2021;398(10316):2084–2092. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02178-4
  3. Palmer T, Wallace L, Pollock KG, et al. Prevalence of cervical disease at age 20 after immunisation with bivalent HPV vaccine at age 12–13 in Scotland. BMJ. 2019;365:l1161. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l1161
  4. Suzuki S, Hosono A. No association between HPV vaccine and reported post-vaccination symptoms in Japanese young women: results of the Nagoya study. Papillomavirus Res. 2018;5:96–103. DOI: 10.1016/j.pvr.2018.02.002
  5. Simms KT, Hanley SJB, Smith MA, et al. Impact of HPV vaccine hesitancy on cervical cancer in Japan: a modelling study. Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(4):e223–e234. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30010-4

Official Surveillance and Public Health References

  1. CDC. Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases (The Pink Book) — HPV chapter. cdc.gov/pinkbook
  2. CDC. Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). cdc.gov/vaccine-safety/about/vsd.html
  3. CDC/FDA. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). vaers.hhs.gov
  4. CDC. 2025 Child & Adolescent Immunization Schedule. cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/imz-schedules
  5. CDC. HPV vaccination coverage data — National Immunization Survey — Teen (NIS-Teen). cdc.gov
  6. Halma, M.; Varon, J. DARE-SAFE: Denominator-Adjusted Rate Estimates of Substance Adverse Events Frequency Evaluation in Pharmaceuticals and Vaccines. Pharmacoepidemiology. 2025, 4, 7. DOI: 10.3390/pharma4020007. CC BY 4.0.

Part of the Open Source Medicine Foundation Network

Open Source Medicine Foundation

Home of the OSMF network — open-source pharmacovigilance tools and evidence-based medicine resources.

Research Tracker

Track peer-reviewed literature on vaccine safety, pharmacovigilance, and post-market surveillance.

SpikeProtein.site

Comprehensive resource on spike protein biology, biodistribution, and clinical implications.

VitalScan4PACVS

Decentralized trial for PACVS (post-acute COVID-19 vaccination syndrome).

PACVS Research Summit

Annual summit convening researchers and clinicians studying post-acute COVID-19 vaccination syndrome.