MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Contact Allergy to Balsam of Peru. II. Patch Test Results in 102 Patients With Selected Balsam of Peru Constituents

2001· article· en· W4256670928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Björn M. Hausen

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsoeugenolConiferyl alcoholMedicinePatch testCinnamic acidEugenolBenzoic acidVanillinBenzyl benzoateResorcinolFerulic acidBenzyl alcoholTraditional medicinePaeoniflorinCinnamyl alcoholBalsamSalicylic acidOrganic chemistryChemistryLigninAllergyFood scienceCinnamaldehydeBotanyBiochemistryHigh-performance liquid chromatographyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In Switzerland, Germany, and Austria, allergic reactions to balsam of Peru (BP) have now made it the third most common contact allergen. Objective: A series of 20 single BP constituents (including resorcinol monobenzoate), established in 1995, was used for patch tests in patients with a positive reaction to BP in the standard series. Materials and Methods: Between 1995 and 1998, 2,273 patients were tested with the standard series, including BP, fragrance mix (FM), and propolis. Patients positive for BP were requested to participate in a further test using the 19 compounds of the BP constituents and resorcin monobenzoate (BP series); 102 patients agreed and were patch tested. The results of the 72-hour reading were used for the evaluation. Results: A total of 93 patients reacted to 1 or more of the BP series compounds. Positive reactions were seen, in decreasing order, to cinnamic alcohol, cinnamic acid, coniferyl benzoate, benzoic acid, cinnamyl cinnamate, eugenol, resorcinol monobenzoate, coniferyl alcohol, and benzyl alcohol. There were no positive reactions to vanillin or ferulic acid. A correlation between skin lesions and frequent consumption of sweets was found in 7 patients with major positive test reactions to coniferyl benzoate and benzyl alcohol. Most of the reactions to eugenol and isoeugenol had less to do with BP itself than with a primary sensitization to fragrances. Although resorcin monobenzoate (RMB) has up to now not been detected in BP, 16 patients reacted distinctly to this compound. Eleven were strong smokers; the remaining ones had contact with plastic materials that have been reported to contain RMB. RMB is used frequently as an antioxidant in synthetic material. When these patients stopped smoking, the skin lesions cleared. However, consumption of sweets caused recurrences. Conclusion: The evaluation of reactions to single constituents of BP by testing with the special BP series facilitates understanding how sensitization may be acquired. The allergen may prove to be BP itself or 1 or more of its constituents. Testing for the constituents of this series may provide patients with a more specific allergen diagnosis and may facilitate improved therapy. BP may function as an important indicator for contact allergy to RMB.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicContact Dermatitis and AllergiesFrench-language works237,207