Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Annual Scientific Meeting 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is commonly caused by allergens from the birch homologous group, which includes birch, oak, hazel, alder and hornbeam, all characterised by having Bet v 1 homologous allergens that extensively cross-react.The current study characterized the ability of the SQ tree SLIT-tablet (containing birch extract) to induce immunological responses that cross-react with all species in the birch homologous group.Methods: Blood samples were collected from adults who had moderate to severe rhinoconjunctivitis induced by birch pollen who were treated with the SQ tree SLIT-tablet for 24 weeks (ClinicalTrials.govIdentifier NCT02481856).Serum IgE (pre-treatment) and IgG4 (posttreatment) specific for birch, oak, hazel, alder, beech, chestnut and hornbeam were measured by standard ImmunoCAP.Correlation analyses and inhibition assays were performed to evaluate immunological cross-reactivity.The study was approved by the Ontario IRB, approval number 12069.Results: The analyses demonstrated a high level of correlation between IgE reactivity (pre-treatment) between birch and alder, hazel, hornbeam and oak.The strongest correlation in IgE titers was observed between birch and alder (r = 0.98), and the weakest between birch and oak (r = 0.83).A strong correlation between IgE titers was also observed for beech, but not for chestnut.The analyses also demonstrated a high level of correlation between IgG4 reactivity (treatment-induced) towards birch and alder, hazel, hornbeam, beech and oak, with the strongest correlation between birch and alder (r = 0.95), and the weakest between birch and oak (r = 0.78).Inhibition experiments revealed that in the majority of patients, alder-, hazel-and oakspecific IgE and IgG4 reactivity was inhibited > 80% by birch allergen extract. Conclusion:The data demonstrate a high level of cross-reactivity between birch-specific IgE and IgG4, and allergens from the birch homologous group, which suggests that the significant clinical effect determined previously for both birch and oak exposure may extend to the entire birch homologous group.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.226 | 0.123 |
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".