The Relationship between Alexithymia and Circulating Cytokine Levels in Subjects Undergoing Upper Endoscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Despite emerging evidence suggesting a link between alexithymia and immune function, previous studies yielded contrasting results. The proposed link between alexithymia and immune function remains controversial as does the role, in this relationship, of anxiety, depression and subjective stress. The aim of the study is to investigate the possible association between alexithymia and circulating levels of cytokines in subjects awaiting an upper endoscopy, a stressful procedure, controlling for anxiety levels, depression and subjective stress. METHODS: Participants were recruited from among consecutive patients referred for routine diagnostic upper endoscopy. All participants completed the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Stress-related Vulnerability Scale. Serum levels of IL-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α and IFN-γ were measured by ELISA. RESULTS: Of the 90 subjects initially approached, 68 completed the study. The TAS-20 identified 22 alexithymic and 36 non-alexithymic patients. ELISA detected significantly lower IL-4 and IL-6 concentrations in alexithymic than in non-alexithymic patients. According to multiple linear regression analysis, alexithymia predicted low IL-4 and IL-6 levels in the sample overall, independently of stress, anxiety, depression and other possible confounders. No between-group differences were found in serum levels of IFN-γ, IL-1β, and TNF-α. CONCLUSION: These findings argue against an isolated shift towards pro-inflammatory or anti-inflammatory mediators and suggest that circulating cytokine profiles differ in alexithymic and non-alexithymic subjects.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".