The bone marrow and airway inflammation: evidence for allergy as a systemic disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Rhinitis and asthma are linked closely epidemiologically, as has been known for quite some time and emphasized in recent surveys (ISAAC study). Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis without asthma symptoms can, as a group, be shown to have increased bronchial hyperresponsiveness. During the course of seasonal allergen exposure, patients with allergic rhinitis can be shown to have increased numbers of inflammatory cells (eosinophils and mast cells) in the lower airways, even without symptoms of lower airway disease. Long‐standing observations from our laboratory have indicated fluctuations of eosinophil/basophil (Eo‐B) progenitors in the peripheral blood in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis, paralleling changes that are recognized in mature eosinophils and basophils in circulation. The finding of Eo‐B progenitor decreases during the height of seasonal allergen exposure led us to hypothesize the concept of ‘in situ haemopoiesis’ to explain a process of systemic activation of haemopoietic mechanisms, in which communication among bone marrow peripheral blood and airway tissue compartments contributed to the allergic inflammatory process at a systemic level. Indeed, allergen challenge to the lower airways in atopic asthmatics elicits an immediate rise in Eo‐B progenitors, especially in subjects with late phase responses. These original observations have been buttressed by a series of investigations demonstrating conclusively that exacerbations of asthma are attended by increases in peripheral blood Eo‐B progenitors; that allergen challenge to dogs or mice with allergic airways inflammation elicits bone marrow progenitor responses, with trafficking of bone marrow cells to the airway either in pure upper or lower airway disease; and that allergen challenge to atopic asthmatics up‐regulates the high affinity receptor for IL‐5 on bone marrow progenitors (IL‐5Rα), beginning a process of eosinophil differentiation that is probably driven by the release of a serum haemopoietic factor – as we have found in the canine model – which acts on the bone marrow and initiates a series of systemic events.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".