Identification of Phenolic Dermal Sensitizers in a Wound Closure Tape
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A latex-allergic patient presented with a severe local reaction to a non-latex wound closure bandage following surgery. Extracts of the bandage were analyzed by gas chromatograph-electron impact-mass spectrometry (GC EI-MS) in the total ion monitoring mode. Components were identified by their ion mass fingerprint and elution time as a corresponding standard from the GC column. The chemicals identified were 4,4'-thiobis-(6-tert-butyl-m-cresol) (TBBC), 6-tert-Butyl-m-cresol (BC), 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol (BP) and erucamide (EA). Sensitization potential of these chemicals was evaluated using two quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) programs. The phenol 2,6-di-tert-butyl-4-(hydroxymethyl)phenol (BHP) was also included in the test series. It was initially thought to be present in the bandage but detectable levels could not be confirmed. The potential for TBBC to induce a sensitization response was predicted by both Derek for Windows and TOPKAT 6.2. The potential for BC and BP to induce a sensitization response was predicted by Derek for Windows, but not TOPKAT. BHP and EA were not predicted to be sensitizers by either QSAR program. Local lymph node assay (LLNA) analysis of the chemicals identified TBBC, BP, and BC as potential sensitizers with EC3 values between 0.2 and 4.5%. None of the animals exhibited body weight loss or skin irritation at the concentrations tested. In agreement with the toxicological modeling, BHP did not induce a sensitization response in the LLNA. Following a positive LLNA response, TBBC, BP, and BC were further characterized by phenotypic analysis of the draining lymph nodes. A positive LLNA result coupled with a lack of increase in B220(+)IgE(+) cell and serum IgE characterize these chemicals as Type IV sensitizers. These studies used a multidisciplinary approach combining clinical observation, GC-EI-MS for chemical identification, QSAR modeling of chemicals prior to animal testing, and the LLNA for determination of the sensitization potential of chemicals in a manufactured product.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it