<i>Helicobacter pylori</i>Anti-CagA Antibodies: Prevalence in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Subjects in Turkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several reports have shown the prevalence of anti-CagA antibodies to be associated with the development of peptic ulcer diseases, while others have indicated that there is no such association. AIM: To examine the prevalence of antibodies to CagA and other Helicobacter pylori antigens in symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects in Turkey. subjects and METHODS: Sixty-six symptomatic subjects, 16 to 74 years of age, were examined for H pylori by biopsy-based tests and ELISA. One hundred nineteen asymptomatic subjects, 20 to 65 years of age, were also tested serologically for the presence of H pylori. Samples from both groups that were found to be positive for H pylori by ELISA were then tested by immunoblotting. RESULTS: Fifty-four (82%) symptomatic subjects and 76 (64%) asymptomatic subjects were found to be H pylori-positive by ELISA. Samples from 30 symptomatic subjects who were found to be H pylori-positive by ELISA were analyzed by immunoblotting. Antibodies to CagA (116 kDa) antigen were detected in immunoblots of 11 of 14 (79%) with chronic gastritis, 12 of 13 (92%) with duodenal ulcer and three of three (100%) with gastric cancer. Antigens of the following molecular weights were also detected in these 30 subjects: 89 kDa (VacA) in 21 (70%), 37 kDa in 21 (70%), 35 kDa in 19 (63%), 30 kDa in 27 (90%) and 19.5 kDa in 19 (63%). Immunoblots of 40 ELISA-positive asymptomatic subjects showed that 33 (83%) had antibodies to CagA antigen, 26 (65%) to VacA antigen, 30 (75%) to a 37 kDa antigen, 30 (75%) to a 35 kDa antigen, 39 (98%) to a 30 kDa antigen and 36 (90%) to a 19.5 kDa antigen. CONCLUSIONS: Antibodies to CagA antigen were prevalent in both groups, regardless of the presence of gastroduodenal disease.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".