Gamma interferon assay as an alternative to PPD skin testing in selected patients with granulomatous intraocular inflammatory disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the QuantiFERON-TB test (gamma interferon assay), approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the detection of latent tuberculosis (LTB), in patients who potentially may require immunosuppressive therapy for ocular inflammatory disease. METHODS: Blood samples from 12 consecutive patients with granulomatous ocular inflammatory disease were evaluated first with the purified protein derivative (PPD) skin test and then with the QuantiFERON-TB test (11 of 12 patients, 1 declined). The results of the 2 tests in both U.S.- and non-U.S.-born patients were compared with their Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination status and chest x-rays. RESULTS: In our small series there was a high degree of concordance between the QuantiFERON-TB assay and the PPD skin test. INTERPRETATION: The QuantiFERON-TB test did not demonstrate intrinsic merit over PPD skin testing for screening for LTB in selected patients when immunosuppressive therapy is considered. The confounding effect of BCG vaccination renders interpretation of both tests difficult. Early reports suggest the second-generation tests that are now available may hold promise for use in the uveitis clinic and should be formally evaluated.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".