MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106106674 · doi:10.1111/all.12794

Clinical and laboratory 2‐year outcome of oral immunotherapy in patients with cow's milk allergy

2015· article· en· W2106106674 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arnon Elizur, Michael Y. Appel, Michael R. Goldberg, Tamar Yichie, Michael B. Levy, Liat Nachshon, Yitzhak Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Health, British Columbia
KeywordsMedicineOral immunotherapyDesensitization (medicine)Basophil activationAllergyMilk allergyImmunotherapyAdverse effectOral food challengeFood allergyAnaphylactic reactionsEpinephrineInternal medicineAnaphylaxisGastroenterologyBasophilImmunoglobulin EImmunologyCancerAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies examining the long-term effect of oral immunotherapy in food-allergic patients are limited. We investigated cow's milk-allergic patients, >6 months after the completion of oral immunotherapy (n = 197). Questionnaires, skin prick tests, and basophil activation assays were performed. Of the 195 patients contacted, 180 (92.3%) were consuming milk protein regularly. Half experienced adverse reactions, mostly mild. Thirteen patients (6.7%) required injectable epinephrine. Higher reaction rate after immunotherapy was associated with more anaphylactic episodes before treatment and a lower starting dose (OR = 2.1, P = 0.035 and OR = 2.3, P = 0.035, respectively). Reaction rate in patients who were 6-15 months, 15-30 months, or >30 months post-treatment decreased from 0.28/month to 0.21/month to 0.15/month, respectively (P < 0.01). Milk-induced %CD63 and %CD203c expression was significantly lower in patients >24 months vs in patients <24 months post-treatment (P = 0.038 and P = 0.047, respectively). In conclusion, many patients experience mild adverse reactions after completing oral immunotherapy and some require injectable epinephrine. Progressive desensitization, both clinically and in basophil reactivity, occurs over time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergySame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207