Allergen Induced Increase in Nonallergic Airway Responsiveness: A Citation Classic Revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present paper revisits the 1977 paper by DW Cockcroft, RE Ruffin, the late J Dolovich and FE Hargreave entitled "Allergen-induced increase in nonallergic bronchial reactivity" (Clin Allergy 1977;7:503-13) that became a citation classic. Although clinical types of asthma were recognized at the time, there was a poor understanding regarding the role of allergic reactions in causing increases in airway hyperresponsiveness. The objective was to study formally Dr Altounyan's observation that patients with asthma showed increases in airway responsiveness at the times of natural allergen exposure during pollen season. Thirteen atopic patients with asthma were studied over two days, following inhalation of diluent (control) and following doubling amounts of an allergen solution at 10-min intervals until forced expiration volume in 1 s fell by 20%. Methacholine and histamine challenges were performed before, at 8 h, at 32 h and seven days following the inhalations. A significant reduction (reduction of at least one doubling concentration) in the provocative concentration that causes a 20% fall in forced expiration volume in 1 s occurred in seven of 13 patients, and more often in subjects with a late bronchoconstrictor response to allergen challenge. IMPORTANCE: The study showed that large changes in airway responsiveness could occur in patients with asthma and suggested that allergens could cause, rather than trigger, asthma. The study also led to the concept of asthma inducers and inciters - inducers causing airway inflammation and inciters provoking bronchospasm. The results led to a series of observations that have now implicated immunoglobulin E-mediated airway inflammation as perhaps the most important cause of airway hyperresponsiveness in asthma.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".