The predictive value of the <i>in vitro</i> platelet toxicity assay (iPTA) for the diagnosis of hypersensitivity reactions to sulfonamides: a case‐control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are rare but potentially fatal types of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that develop in susceptible patients following exposure to certain drugs including sulfonamides. The diagnosis of this type of ADRs is challenging and currently depends on clinical expertise. A safe and reliable in vitro test to diagnose DHRs would be a major advance in patient care and in evaluation of possible serious ADRs during drug development and clinical trials. Current available in vitro tests including the lymphocyte toxicity assay (LTA) and the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) are cumbersome and expensive, and their predictive values are undefined. We have recently developed a novel in vitro diagnostic test for DHRs, the in vitro platelet toxicity assay (iPTA) to test patient susceptibility to DHS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of the iPTA in diagnosis of DHRs to sulfonamide antibiotics. We have recruited 66 individuals (36 DHS-sulfa patients and 30 healthy controls) to participate in the study. The DHR cases were referred and diagnosed based on rigorous internationally accepted criteria. Blood samples were obtained and both LTA and iPTA were performed independently. Results were then analyzed to determine the degree of agreement between the likelihood of the occurrence of the reaction as determined clinically and the performance of the two diagnostic approaches. There was concentration-dependent toxicity in the cells of patients when incubated with the reactive hydroxylamine metabolite of sulfamethoxazole for both the LTA and iPTA (p<0.05) and toxicity was significantly greater for the cells of patients versus controls (p<0.05). The tests had a high degree of agreement (correlation coefficient: R2 = 0.97). The iPTA was significantly more sensitive than the conventional LTA test in detecting the susceptibility of patient cells to in vitro toxicity (p<0.05). The novel iPTA has considerable potential as an investigative tool for DHS as it is cheaper to perform and requires no special reagents that make it an excellent candidate for wider use. The iPTA has also a greater sensitivity in detecting patients with predisposition to develop DHRs to sulfonamides and other drugs and thus can be used to screen for susceptible patients prior to drug prescribing and during drug development process.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".