Usefulness of the QuantiFERON<sup>®</sup>test in the confirmation of latent tuberculosis in association with erythema induratum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conflicts of interest: none declared. Sir, There is a wide variety of clinical presentations of cutaneous tuberculosis. Erythema induratum of Bazin is considered to be a tuberculide, a hypersensitivity response to Mycobacterium tuberculosis, in which typically there is a positive tuberculin test, evidence of manifest or past tuberculosis and a positive response to antituberculous therapy. There is ongoing debate about the pathogenesis of tuberculides and their association with M. tuberculosis,1 which is thought to be a type IV, cell‐mediated response to an antigenic stimulus presumed to be mycobacterial antigens. The use of polymerase chain reaction to detect mycobacterial DNA in skin lesions has recently strengthened this association.2 Tuberculin skin tests (TSTs) have been in widespread use for the detection of asymptomatic infection, currently termed latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). There is growing interest in other diagnostic tests for LTBI that might be simpler to interpret. As a result two ex vivo interferon (IFN)‐γ release assays (IGRAs) are now commercially available. We report the usefulness of the QuantiFERON®‐TB Gold (QFT‐TB) test (Cellestis, Carnegie, Vic., Australia) in the confirmation of LTBI in a patient with erythema induratum.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.007 |
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".