Diisocyanate Antigen-stimulated Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein-1 Synthesis Has Greater Test Efficiency than Specific Antibodies for Identification of Diisocyanate Asthma
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously reported that diisocyanate-human serum albumin (DIISO-HSA) stimulated production of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) by peripheral blood mononuclear cells is significantly associated with a clinical diagnosis of diisocyanate asthma (DA). Others have reported that antibodies for DIISO-HSA are specific but insensitive markers of DA. This study was performed to evaluate test characteristics of the in vitro MCP-1 assay compared with DIISO-HSA-specific immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgE in identifying workers with DA. MCP-1 was quantitated in peripheral blood mononuclear cell supernatants 48 hours after incubation with DIISO-HSA antigens. Assay results were compared with outcomes of specific inhalation challenge (SIC) testing. Nineteen of 54 (35%) workers assayed for antibodies and MCP-1 stimulation had SIC-confirmed DA. Mean MCP-1 produced by SIC-positive workers was greater than SIC-negative workers (p < or = 0.001). Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and test efficiency for specific IgG were 47%, 74%, and 65%, respectively, and for specific IgE were 21%, 89%, and 65%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and test efficiency of the MCP-1 test were 79%, 91%, and 87%, respectively. This study indicates that the MCP-1 stimulation assay has greater sensitivity and specificity than the specific antibody assays in correctly identifying DA.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 it