Decreased numbers of metachromatic cells in nasal swabs in Japanese cedar pollinosis following sublingual immunotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Nasal symptoms were reduced following allergen-specific sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for allergic rhinitis. The mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of SLIT for Japanese cedar pollinosis are poorly understood. We studied changes in the numbers of metachromatic cells, eosinophils, and neutrophils following SLIT for Japanese cedar pollinosis. METHODS: Nasal swabs were taken in the preseason (n = 32) and in pollinosis season (n = 49) from subjects given sublingual drop immunotherapy for an average duration of 1.5 years. The numbers of metachromatic cells (mast cells and basophils), eosinophils and neutrophils were determined and compared with those from untreated subjects in preseason (n = 65) and in season (n = 54). RESULTS: SLIT subjects had a significantly reduced frequency of moderate to most severe symptoms in comparison to untreated subjects in preseason (P < .001, the Mann-Whitney U test), and (P < .00001) in season. Metachromatic cell counts in nasal swabs of SLIT subjects in preseason and in season were lower than those of untreated subjects (P = .014, the Mann-Whitney U test) and (P = .00001) respectively. Eosinophil numbers in SLIT subjects were not significantly different than in untreated subjects in both preseason (P = .29) and in season (P = .09). However, when SLIT subjects in season were divided into those with greater than or equal to 1.5 years, or <1.5 years of SLIT duration, the degree of eosinophilia in those with SLIT greater than or equal to 1.5 years was significantly lower (P = .011) than in untreated patients, but not in those with SLIT less than 1.5 years (P = .9). There were no significant differences in neutrophil numbers in nasal swabs between untreated and SLIT subjects in preseason and in season. CONCLUSION: One of mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of sublingual drop immunotherapy for Japanese cedar pollinosis is a reduction of the number of metachromatic cells in preseason and in season. Eosinophilia was also reduced in season in those given SLIT for greater than or equal to 1.5 years.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".