Combination of Probiotics and Sublingual Immunotherapy in Allergic Rhinitis: A Real-Life Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Probiotics are increasingly recognized as capable of modulating immune responses. Some probiotic strains show the potential of inducing a different lymphocyte polarization, promoting the Th1 phenotype and inhibiting, at the same time, the allergy-prone Th2 phenotype. On this basis, we could expect that probiotics may act synergistically to improve the clinical efficacy of sublingual allergen immunotherapy (SLIT). In this study, 30 patients affected by allergic rhinitis undergoing SLIT, were concomitantly administered a probiotic supplement (n = 14) or not (n = 16), according to their preference. Nasal symptom score, rescue medication score and ‘well-days’ were evaluated after 2 and 4 months of treatment. Patients who were administered SLIT plus probiotics showed a trend toward reduction of the nasal symptoms (-7.1%, p = ns) with a significant reduction of medication score (-32.6, p = 0.02) and an increase of ‘well-days’ (35.1, p = 0.02). These preliminary data, from a small study population, suggest that this combined approach with SLIT and probiotics could result in an increased efficacy of the SLIT treatment.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".