Anaphylaxis to Kamut® flour in an adult patient: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wheat products are nearly ubiquitous in society and are found in many food and non-food products. There are now a variety of Ancient grains that were previously not used in foodstuff in the Western diet. Kamutâ (khorasan wheat) flour is an ancient grain that was introduced in North America in the late nineties. It is commonly found in multigrain products. Our patient is a 24-year-old female with a past medical history of well-controlled asthma. She describes oral itch and throat itch lasting 30 minutes with eating various types of multigrain products over several years. She eats whole wheat and white bread products without difficulty. After ingesting two pieces of pizza made with Kamutâ flour she developed chest tightness, back pain, vomiting, difficulty swallowing, and continued itch in her throat. Her symptoms resolved within an hour of taking an antihistamine. She underwent skin prick testing to the multiple bread products that she had reacted to in the past, as well as Kamutâ flour. Kamutâ flour had a 5mm and 7mm wheal with 22mm and 20mm flare respectively on two independent skin tests. Tests to the other multigrain products were also positive. After review of ingredient lists of the multigrain products she underwent further testing to a number of less commonly used flours and had positive tests to tritecare, quinoa and amaranth flours. She now carries an epinephrine injector and avoids multigrain and ancient grain products, including Kamutâ. To our knowledge this is the first case of anaphylaxis to Kamutâ flour.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".