MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134303114 · doi:10.1186/1710-1492-9-11

Proposed new mechanism for food and exercise induced anaphylaxis based on case studies

2013· article· en· W2134303114 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jennifer Yan Fei Chen, Jaclyn Quirt, Kihyuk Jason Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesQueen's UniversitySt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnaphylaxisIngestionFood allergyMedicineOral allergy syndromeAllergyAllergenMechanism (biology)Food allergensImmunologyAntigenAntecedent (behavioral psychology)DermatologyFood scienceInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present two cases of food and exercise-induced anaphylaxis (FEIA) in patients with a diagnosis of oral allergy syndrome (OAS) to the implicated foods. Patient A had FEIA attributed to fresh coriander and tomato and Patient B to fresh celery. These food allergens have been implicated in OAS and have structural antigenic similarity to that of birch and/or grass. Both patients' allergies were confirmed by fresh skin prick tests. In both cases, strenuous exercise was antecedent to the systemic anaphylaxis reaction and subsequent ingestion without exercise produced only local symptoms of perioral pruritus. We review the current proposed mechanisms for food and exercise induced anaphylaxis to oral allergens and propose a novel and more biologically plausible mechanism. We hypothesize that the inhibitory effects of exercise on gastric acid secretion decreases the digestion of oral allergens and preserves structural integrity, thereby allowing continued systemic absorption of the allergen whether it be profilins, lipid transfer proteins, or other antigenic determinants.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical ImmunologySame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207