Clinical Features, Immunological Characteristics, and Treatment Outcomes of Campylobacter spp. Infections in Patients With Common Variable Immunodeficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Campylobacter infection usually causes a self-limited clinical illness lasting 5 to 7 days, resolving without antimicrobial treatment in immunocompetent subjects. However, an inadequate immune response can lead to a prolonged and severe disease requiring antibiotics and more aggressive therapeutic approaches. OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively describe Campylobacter spp. infections in patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 14 CVID patients with Campylobacter infection and 95 CVID controls attending the immunology clinic at a large tertiary hospital was assessed. Immunological, clinical, and microbiological parameters were measured with median follow-up over 20 years in both cohorts. Patients were treated according to a novel algorithm for Campylobacter in antibody-deficient patients. RESULTS: Campylobacter patients had a higher proportion of CD21lowCD38low and transitional B cells (median 38.0% vs 14.2% and 5.4% vs 3.2%) and lower long-term average CD19+ B cells (median 0.06 vs 0.18 × 109/L) and CD4+ T cells (0.41 vs 0.62 × 109/L) in comparison with the controls. Similarly, Campylobacter patients showed a decline in B cells (median 0.02 vs 0.14 × 109/L), CD4+ T cells (0.33 vs 0.59 × 109/L), CD8+ T cells (0.26 vs 0.62 × 109/L), and natural killer cells (0.08 vs 0.18 × 109/L) over time. Antimicrobial resistance, especially to macrolides and fluoroquinolones, was common. Bacterial clearance with associated clinical improvement was obtained after a median of 20 and 113 days for acute Campylobacter (resolution within 3 mo of onset) and chronic Campylobacter (>3 mo) infections, respectively. Seven received first-line treatment (azithromycin or chloramphenicol), 4 second-line (neomycin), and 3 third-line (combination of tigecycline, chloramphenicol, and ertapenem; 1 received gentamicin owing to resistance to carbapenems). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights immunological and clinical characteristics of recurrent Campylobacter infections in patients with CVID. Our treatment algorithm was successful and should be evaluated in a larger cohort.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".