Exhaled nitric oxide, nitrite/nitrate levels, allergy, rhinitis and asthma in the EGEA study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although interest in biomarkers in the nitrate-nitrite-NO pathway has recently increased, associations between nitrite (NO2(-)) and nitrate (NO3(-)), and asthma, allergic sensitisation and rhinitis remain unclear. The study aimed to evaluate the associations between NO2(-)/NO3(-) and exhaled fraction of nitric oxide (FeNO) levels with asthma, allergic sensitisation and rhinitis. Plasma and exhaled breath condensate (EBC) NO2(-)/NO3(-) and FeNO levels were measured in 523 adults of the French Epidemiological study on Genetics and Environment of Asthma. Allergic sensitisation was defined by a positive skin prick test for at least one aeroallergen. Subjects were classified as non-sensitised, sensitised and as having allergic rhinitis. Plasma NO2 (-)/NO3(-) level was unrelated to any disease phenotypes. EBC NO2(-)/NO3(-) level was unrelated to any asthma phenotypes. EBC NO2(-)/NO3(-) and FeNO levels were correlated in sensitised subjects only (r = 0.21 ± 0.10, p=0.01). EBC NO2(-)/NO3(-) and FeNO levels were higher in sensitised than in non-sensitised subjects (adjusted geometric mean (95% CI): 2.36 (1.96-2.84) versus 1.72 (1.38-2.14) μmol per mg proteins, p=0.008; and 18.3 (16.7-20.0) versus 14.8 (13.3-16.5) ppb, p=0.0006, respectively), with gradual relationships from sensitised subjects to those with allergic rhinitis (p<0.0001). Results suggest that EBC NO2(-)/NO3(-) and FeNO levels may be considered as biological markers of intensity of allergic sensitisation and rhinitis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".