Atopic and non‐atopic eosinophilic oesophagitis are distinguished by immunoglobulin E‐bearing intraepithelial mast cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) occurs in atopic individuals and features eosinophils and mast cells, but differences in the inflammatory cell density between the epithelium and lamina propria (LP) are not fully understood. The aim of this study was to determine if numbers of eosinophils, B lymphocytes and immunoglobulin E (IgE)-bearing mast cells are increased in the mucosa of EoE patients with and without concurrent atopy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Oesophageal biopsies containing ≥ 4 high-power fields (HPF) of epithelium and LP were identified for normal (n = 9), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (n = 5) and EoE (n = 25) patients. Patients were classified as atopic or not by clinical history. Immunohistochemistry identified mast cells, B lymphocytes and eosinophils. Eosinophil density was increased in the LP in EoE. Intraepithelial eosinophil density correlated with eosinophils/HPF, CD20(+) B lymphocyte density and tryptase(+) IgE(+) mast cell density. Increased intraepithelial IgE(+) cell density in EoE was associated with mast cells and not B lymphocytes. Intraepithelial IgE(+) mast cell densities were significantly higher in biopsies from the subgroup of EoE patients with atopy. CONCLUSIONS: EoE diagnosis using maximal eosinophil count/HPF correlates with average counts/mm(2), and intraepithelial eosinophil densities are higher in children than adults with EoE. In EoE, numbers of eosinophils and mast cells are increased in the LP. IgE-bearing mast cells are increased in atopic EoE patients but not in non-atopic EoE patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".