Persistence of respiratory and inflammatory responses after dermal sensitization to persulfate salts in a mouse model of non-atopic asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exposure to ammonium persulfate (AP) has been reported to be the main cause of occupational asthma in hairdressers. The aim of this study is to assess how long the asthmatic response to AP can be induced after dermal sensitization in a mouse model. METHODS: BALB/c mice received dermal applications of AP or dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) (control) on days 1 and 8. They then received a single nasal instillation (challenge) of AP or saline on days 15, 22, 29, 36, 45, 60 and 90. Respiratory responsiveness to methacholine was measured 24 h after the challenge using a non-specific methacholine provocation test. Pulmonary inflammation was analysed in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), and total serum immunoglobulin (Ig) E, IgG1 and IgG2a were measured in serum samples. Histological analysis of lung slides was performed. RESULTS: Mice dermally sensitized and intranasally challenged with AP showed respiratory responsiveness to methacholine as long as 45 days after initial sensitization, as well as increased percentage of neutrophils in BAL compared with the control group. At day 60, dermally sensitized mice still presented bronchial hyperresponsiveness, while the percentage of neutrophils returned to baseline levels similar to those of controls. Total serum IgE increased significantly on day 22 after dermal sensitization. Total serum IgG1 and IgG2a increased from 45 days after dermal sensitization and remained high at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: Both respiratory responsiveness to methacholine and airway inflammation responses decrease with increasing time between sensitization and challenge. Respiratory responsiveness to methacholine tends to persist longer than inflammation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".