270 Clinical Experience in Allergic Asthma Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of omalizumab and specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) as a treatment modality in patients with more than one allergic-type condition. METHODS: In the first group (Group A), 2 males and 7 females with severe persistent asthma and a mean age of 34.2 years received omalizumab and SCIT. In the second group (Group B), 4 males and 2 females with severe persistent asthma and a mean age of 52.7 years received omalizumab only. In the third group (Group C), 1 male and 3 females with severe persistent asthma and a mean age of 28.8 years received omalizumab followed by SCIT. All patients were followed for 2 years and comparisons were made using pulmonary function tests and asthma control tests. RESULTS: The patients studied had severe persistent asthma for periods ranging from 2 to 10 years, and in addition had been diagnosed as allergic asthmatics for 5 to 40 years. The mean IgE levels were as follows: Group A: 553.9 IU/mL; Group B: 422.3 IU/Ml; and Group C: 383.5 IU/mL. In all 3 groups results in the asthma control test increased by 2.5 fold over the period of study. CONCLUSIONS: After the addition of SCIT to omalizumab therapy at 48 week of our study, no change was detected in urticarial attack rates. In another 17 year old male patient with moderate allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, asthma and atopic dermatitis, omalizumab administration with SCIT at the same time, increased the severity of atopic dermatitis. We stopped the immunotherapy than the skin lesions lost.omalizumab therapy is continued.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".