Comparative Influence of a Single Allergen Exposure on the Different Components of Airway Response to Methacholine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared the effects of an allergen challenge on airway responsiveness to methacholine, the slope of the dose-response curve (DRC) and post-methacholine fall in forced vital capacity (FVC) or forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/FVC, and determined whether any changes in these parameters were related to the presence and magnitude of the late asthmatic response (LAR) in mild stable asthma. Twenty-three allergic asthmatic subjects had an allergen challenge, preceded and followed 24 (n = 12) and/or 48 (n = 22) h later by a methacholine challenge. Sixteen subjects had a dual asthmatic response to the allergen. On the post-allergen methacholine challenge, as compared with the pre-allergen test, differences in mean fall in FVC or FEV1/FVC at 20% fall in FEV1 and the slope of the DRC did not achieve statistical significance, even in the group with LAR, which showed a significant increase in airway responsiveness at 24 h. There was, however, a correlation between allergen-induced changes in PC20 and (1) the change in post-methacholine FVC fall in the LAR group at 48 h, and (2) the change in the slope of the DRC in the early-asthmatic-response group at 24 h. In conclusion, allergen-challenge-induced changes in airway response to methacholine are heterogeneous among asthmatic subjects and although it may increase airway responsiveness (PC20), particularly in late responders, it minimally affects the other aspects of airway response to methacholine, suggesting that a more powerful or sustained allergic stimulus is required to modify the latter.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".