Total IgE levels are linked to the response of chronic spontaneous urticaria patients to omalizumab
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here, we compared complete responders (CR) to non-responders (NR) and partial 18 responders (PR) to identify predictors for response.In total, we analyzed 85 patients 19 from 4 GA²LEN urticaria centers of reference and excellence (UCAREs) (5), 43 CR, 20 23 PR, and 19 NR to omalizumab treatment (Table 1).Complete, partial and non-21 response was defined as the reduction of signs and symptoms by ≥90%, by ≥30% 22 but <90%, and by <30% (physicians global assessment), respectively, after 2 four-23 weekly injections of omalizumab 300 mg.All centers provided data on NRs 24 comparing patient characteristics, laboratory values, and treatment response.In 25 addition, all centers were asked to provide data on at least one PR and CR per 26 entered NR.Because different methods of total IgE assessment with different 27 reference values were used, the total IgE-values were transferred to percentage 28 scores of the respective upper reference value.Total IgE levels of 0%-10%, >10%-29 50%, and >50%-100% were regarded as low normal, mid normal, and high normal, 30 whereas total IgE levels of >100%-250%, >250%-1000%, and >1000% were 31 regarded as slightly elevated, moderately elevated, and highly elevated.Statistical 32 analyses were done with SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics, Version 22).33 No differences were found between the three responder groups (CR, PR, and NR) 34 Page 1 of 9 Allergy upregulating activity as an immunological marker to predict response to treatment 121 with omalizumab in patients with symptomatic chronic urticaria.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".