Efficacy of Timothy grass allergy immunotherapy tablet (AIT) treatment in Canadian children and adults with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of Timothy grass AIT treatment on a Canadian subpopulation was assessed post-hoc using data from 2 randomized, double-blind, trials designed to evaluate grass AIT in North American subjects. Subjects 5 years and older with ARC with/without asthma received once-daily 2800 BAU sublingual grass AIT (oral lyophilisate, Phleum pratense , 75,000 SQ-T, ~15μg Phl p5) or placebo starting approximately 16 weeks before and continuing throughout the 2009 grass pollen season (GPS). Subjects used daily e-diaries to record ARC symptoms and use of symptomatic medications from randomization through study end (approximately 24 weeks). The primary efficacy endpoint comprised the average total combined daily symptom and medication score (TCS) during the entire GPS. Secondary endpoints included average daily symptom score (DSS) and average daily medication score (DMS). Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events (AEs). The Canadian subpopulation included 103 subjects (46 pediatric [5-17y]; 57 adult [18-65y]). AIT-treated subjects showed reductions, vs placebo, of 38% ( P =.016) for entire and 45% ( P =.005) for peak seasons in TCS; of 38% ( P =.013) for entire and 40% ( P =.008) for peak seasons in DSS; and of 39% for entire ( P =.238) and 60% ( P =.005) for peak seasons in DMS. Among the overall population, most treatment-related AEs were mild or moderate. No serious or life-threatening treatment-related AEs occurred; no new safety concerns emerged. Timothy grass AIT, a novel therapeutic modality, significantly improved ARC caused by Timothy grass pollen and related grasses in Canadian adults and children 5 years and older.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".