Patterns of IgE sensitization in house dust mite‐allergic patients: implications for allergen immunotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding patterns of IgE sensitization in Dermatophagoides-allergic patients living in various geographical areas is necessary to design a product suitable for worldwide allergen immunotherapy (AIT). METHODS: Using a HIFI Allergy customized microarray assay, IgEs specific for 12 purified allergens from Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus or D. farinae were assessed in sera from 1302 house dust mite (HDM)-allergic patients living in various areas. Comprehensive mass spectrometric (MS) analyses were conducted to characterize HDM extracts, as well as purified bodies and feces. RESULTS: Patterns of IgE reactivity to HDM allergens are comparable in all cohorts of patients analyzed, encompassing adults and 5- to 17-year-old children, as well as American, Canadian, European, and Japanese patients. Overall, >70% and >80% of HDM-allergic patients are sensitized to group 1 and group 2 allergens, respectively, from D. pteronyssinus and/or D. farinae species. Furthermore, 20-47% of patients also have IgEs to allergens from groups 4, 5, 7, 13, 15, 21, and 23. All patients have IgEs to allergens present in mite bodies and feces. MS-based analyses confirmed the presence of mite allergens recorded by IUIS in D. pteronyssinus and D. farinae extracts, with groups 2, 8, 10, 11, 14, and 20 prominent in bodies and groups 1, 6, 18, and 23 well represented in feces. CONCLUSIONS: Mite-specific AIT should rely upon a mixture of D. pteronyssinus and D. farinae extracts, manufactured from both feces and bodies. Such a combination is appropriate to treat children and adult Dermatophagoides-allergic patients from Asia, Europe, and North America.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".