Probiotics for the Prevention and Treatment of Allergies, with an Emphasis on Mode of Delivery and Mechanism of Action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allergy, also termed type I hypersensitivity, is defined as a "disease following a response by the immune system to an otherwise innocuous antigen". The prevalence of allergies is high and escalating, with almost half the populations of North America and Europe having allergies to one or more common environmental antigens. Although rarely life-threatening allergies cause much distress and pose an important economic burden. Recent studies demonstrate the importance of the commensal bacteria of the gastrointestinal tract, termed the microbiota, in stimulating and modulating the immune system. This goes hand-in-hand with the hygiene hypothesis, proposed by Strachan in 1989. With this in mind, the use of pre- and probiotics has gained interest to prevent and treat allergies through modulation of the gut microbiota and the immune system. Probiotics, namely Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria, are live microorganisms that can be incorporated in the diet in the form of functional foods or dietary supplements to beneficially influence the host. In recent studies, probiotic formulations demonstrated the capability to successfully modulate allergic rhinitis, atopic disorders and food-related allergies. A number of probiotic mechanisms of action are involved in controlling hypersensitivity responses, many of which are still not yet understood. Microencapsulation has gained importance as a device for the oral delivery of probiotic cells and may play an important role in the development of a successful probiotic formulation to treat and prevent allergies. Despite the promising research on probiotic biotherapeutics, further investigations are required to develop a successful therapeutic to treat and prevent allergies.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".