You have a good point, David. There should be some kind of healthcare study focused on HPV and OC cancer onset. In other words, a major study should pay for HPV testing of people who fit the profile but are only "suspected". By statistically sampling the "suspected" pool, a mathematical model could be developed to predict HPV involvement across the entire population of OC patients for whom other risk factors don't seem to apply. This study would reveal the full extent (such as it may be) of HPV in OC oncogenesis.

To advocate for (i.e., cost-justify) such a study, a substantial public health benefit would have to be clearly delineated. I don't think feeling good about one's treatment would be sufficient. (And I don't mean to belittle that benefit, it has lifted my spirits as it did yours. I just don't think it alone is sufficient in a cold-eyed cost/benefit analysis.)

Could knowledge of broad HPV involvement (our hypothesis) be used to reduce the incidence of oral cancer, and thus public health costs? Possibly. It would depend on a public education campaign aimed at younger, sexually active adults, and other policy choices.

What would be the desired behavior changes? (1) Reduce oral-genital contact. (But what a loss of pleasure!) (2) Have partner tested for HPV before having oral sex. (Not very spontaneous.) (3) More aggressive testing and treatment of HPV among all women.