Deficient Immune Response to Viral Infections in Children Predicts Later Asthma Persistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rhinovirus infection is the most frequent cause of asthma exacerbations in children, and respiratory viral infections in early life have been associated with increased risk for asthma later on (1). However, the mechanisms driving this association are incompletely understood. We recently showed that deficient antiviral immune responses by bronchial epithelium, with decreased rhinovirus-induced IFN production and increased viral replication, are already present in preschool children with asthma (with or without atopy) and in atopic children without asthma (2). Our original cohort of 34 children was prospectively followed for 8 years to investigate whether the impaired rhinovirus- induced IFN production seen in the original population could be a risk factor for the development of asthma later in life (as diagnosed by a respiratory pediatrician blinded to antiviral response data). \nOur results seem to confirm this possibility. Analyses of epithelial IFN production and viral replication along with epithelial destruction and eosinophil counts in bronchial biopsies were performed as previously reported (2). Follow-up data were available for 27 children: 62% of children with asthma at baseline remained asthmatic at follow-up, whereas 21% of children with no asthma at baseline developed asthma.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".