MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989502422 · doi:10.1159/000236175

Specific Activation of Platelets from Patients Allergic to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus by Synthetic Peptides Derived from the Allergen Der p I

2009· article· en· W1989502422 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Cardot, Joël Pestel, Ina Callebaut, Philippe Lassalle, Anne Tsicopoulos, Hélène Gras‐Masse, Arnaud Capron, M. Joseph

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Allergy and Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlateletAllergenImmunologyImmunoglobulin EPeptideAllergyAntibodyPlatelet activationAntigenMedicineChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have shown that Fc epsilon RII-bearing platelets from patients with allergic disorders could be stimulated either by anti-human IgE antibodies or the relevant allergens to generate cytotoxic mediators. In this report, the reactivity of platelets from Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (D. pt)-sensitive patients to three Der p I-derived synthetic peptides (52-71, 117-133 and 188-199) was investigated. The platelet stimulation observed in D. pt-sensitive patients was demonstrated to be allergen-specific and to be mediated by IgE. These Der p I-derived peptides failed to stimulate platelets from healthy donors or platelets from non-D. pt-allergic patients. D. pt-sensitive patients responded more frequently to the peptides 52-71 and 117-133 than to the peptide 188-199. Thus, in this model, synthetic peptides selected for their assumed accessibility on the native antigen could be associated to an IgE-dependent biological activity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of Allergy and ImmunologySame topicAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFrench-language works237,207