Measurement and interpretation of pneumococcal IgG levels for clinical management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The detection of pneumococcal IgG antibodies is helpful for the evaluation of response to pneumococcal vaccination and need for revaccination. Results generated by the clinical assay which is currently used, in which the 23 valent polysaccharide vaccine is the antigen, were compared to those obtained by a capsular polysaccharide serotype-specific assay that measures IgG antibodies to 9 common serotypes causing invasive disease. Discrepancies in 21/47 (45%) of the results were observed in a direct comparison between the two assays. In each case a positive titre was obtained on the clinical assay but IgG levels on the serotype-specific assay were below the putative protective level of 0.2 micro g/ml for at least one of the 9 serotypes assayed. The generation of false positives by the current clinical assay is due to its lack of specificity. Antibodies to C-polysaccharide and all of the 23 serotypes included in the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine are incorporated into the final titre whereas the serotype-specific assay adsorbs out noncapsular polysaccharide antibodies. The discrepancies between the two assays highlight the importance of standardized assays that measure putative correlates of protection and demonstrate the need to re-evaluate the current clinical assay. A tool that allows the interpretation of the results of the serotype-specific assay is provided and its potential for assessing individual susceptibility levels to vaccine preventable pneumococcal infection is discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".