Assessment of TSLP, IL 25 and IL 33 in patients with shrimp allergy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shrimp allergy is a growing problem among the European population. TSLP, IL-25 and IL-33 are involved in the pathophysiology of allergic diseases, including asthma and atopic dermatitis, as they activate the Th2-dependent immune response. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients (18 male and 19 female) with a positive history of symptoms associated with shrimp consumption were selected. All patients had blood samples taken to assess the concentration of allergen-specific IgE (sIgE) to house dust mites (HDM) and shrimp (Singleplex, quantitative method with cut off value > 0,35 kAU/L) as well as the level of allergen components using the ImmunoCap ISAC method (Microarray test, semi-quantitative with cut off value > 0,3 ISU-E). The concentrations of TSLP, IL-25 and IL-33 in the patients' blood serum was assessed using the ELISA method (Cusabio). Twenty patients with negative allergy history of allergic disease tests were included in the control group. RESULTS: Among the 37 shrimp-allergic patients, ImmunoCap ISAC was identified the presence of sIgE to the available shrimp allergen components in only 14 cases (37.8%). TSLP and IL25 levels were significantly higher in the study group. No statistically significant correlation was found between the concentration of analyzed alarmins and the concentration of sIgE level to shrimp or HDM between the study and control groups. No statistically significant correlation was found between poly-sensitization occurring in patients and levels of TSLP, IL-25 and IL-33 . CONCLUSION: In shrimp-allergic patients, the concentrations of TSLP and IL-25 were significantly higher than in the control group (1.33 vs. 0.49 and 157 vs. 39.36, respectively). There was no correlation between the concentrations of TSLP, IL-25 and IL-33 and the concentration of sIgE in the patients or the number of allergen components that the patients were sensitized to. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Bioethics Committee 147/2015, 11.03.2015.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".