Diagnostic relevance of the lymphocyte transformation test for sensitization to beryllium and other metals (IUPAC Technical Report)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) has been proven useful especially in the diagnosis of drug-induced allergic disorders. It is an in vitro test which is based on the fact that lymphocytes, which have been sensitized by a certain antigen, transform into blasts and proliferate when they are again exposed to this antigen. This proliferation is determined by measurement of the incorporation of [3H ]-thymidine or bromodeoxyuridine into replicating DNA. The test has the advantage over skin tests of avoiding re-exposure of individuals, and it was, therefore, hoped that it may also help to diagnose metal allergies and especially sensitization toward beryllium. However, the LTT measures only the sensitization of lymphocytes, but not the effector reaction, i.e., there may be positive results in exposed individuals even in the absence of clinical symptoms. There are several reports evaluating the LTT toward gold salts (Au), amalgam (Hg), nickel (Ni), beryllium (Be), and several other metals. With metals other than Be, the LTT appears to be of little use. In contrast, the LTT with Be may, indeed, define patients at risk of developing chronic beryllium disease (CBD), which affects mainly the respiratory tract and may even cause death. Beryllium sensitization progresses to CBD at a rate of 7-11 % per year. Since the Be-LTT can detect sensitization in workers who have not yet developed a disease it is an important diagnostic tool to detect individuals at risk. In conclusion, the LTT can detect a cell-mediated immunological response of an individual to metals. However, for most metals its usefulness is questionable, with the exception of Be; a positive Be-LTT can identify not only patients with CBD, but also persons at risk of developing CBD in later years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".