Whole stimulated salivary flow: Correlation with the pathology of inflammation and damage in minor salivary gland biopsy specimens from patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome but not patients with sicca
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine which measure of the salivary flow rate, stimulated or unstimulated, is most strongly associated with pathologic changes in minor salivary gland (MSG) biopsy specimens, and to explore the correlation of salivary flow with oral surface damage, disease duration, and symptom severity in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome (SS). METHODS: In all patients (n = 32), a biopsy of the MSG was performed, and stimulated salivary flow was assessed. Beginning in 2002, unstimulated salivary flow was also assessed. Scores for the severity of symptoms, according to the decayed/missing/filled teeth (DMF) index, were recorded. Associations between measures of salivary flow and covariates characterizing pathology were examined. RESULTS: A definite association between stimulated salivary flow and the MSG focus score, the grade of MSG fibrosis, the duration of dry mouth symptoms, and the DMF score was observed. In contrast, unstimulated salivary flow was not associated with fibrosis, atrophy, the DMF score, or the duration of dry mouth symptoms. In patients with primary SS, the DMF score was associated with pathologic changes in the MSG. Among patients with sicca, 57.9% had an abnormal unstimulated salivary flow rate (versus 82.4% of patients with primary SS), and 15.2% had an abnormal stimulated salivary flow rate (versus 61.8% of patients with primary SS). Among patients with sicca, neither stimulated salivary flow nor unstimulated salivary flow was associated with the degree of fibrosis or atrophy or with the DMF score. CONCLUSION: Compared with unstimulated salivary flow, stimulated salivary flow appeared to be a better measure of inflammation (according to the focus score) and fibrosis. In patients with sicca, the unstimulated salivary flow rate appeared to be abnormal more commonly compared with the stimulated salivary flow rate. In the future, stimulated salivary flow may serve as a noninvasive surrogate biomarker of inflammation and fibrosis as well as a measure of response to treatment in patients with primary SS.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".