Specific inhalation challenge with flour induced release of brain‐derived neurotrophic factor in nasal fluid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurotrophins may play a role in the pathophysiology of allergic occupational rhinitis (OR). We sought to investigate whether an immediate allergic reaction that induces nasal inflammation is also able to induce changes in levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in nasal lavage (NAL) fluid from patients with allergic OR. METHODS: Ten patients sensitized to flour underwent control and active specific inhalation challenge (SIC) on consecutive days. Nasal response to SIC was monitored with acoustic rhinometry and symptoms recording. NAL was performed before and 30 minutes, 6 hours, and 24 hours after control and active challenge for the assessment of levels of BDNF and inflammatory cells in NAL fluid. RESULTS: In contrast to control day, flour challenge induced immediate clinical reactions in all subjects. After flour challenge, a significant increase in levels of BDNF in NAL fluid was observed at 6 hours after challenge (p < 0.05). Also, a significant increase in the number of eosinophils in NAL fluid at 30 minutes (p < 0.01), 6 hours (p < 0.01), and 24 hours (p = 0.05) postchallenge was observed. Also, levels of BDNF in NAL fluid were significantly higher at 30 minutes after flour challenge (p = 0.02) in comparison to levels on the control day at the same postchallenge time. A marginally significant positive correlation between BDNF levels and eosinophil counts at 30 minutes (r = 0.60, p = 0.06) and at 6 hours (r = 0.50, p = 0.08) after flour challenge was noted. CONCLUSION: We showed that BDNF is released in nasal fluid after SIC with flour. Results support the suggestion that neurotrophins may play a role in the pathogenesis of allergic OR.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".