Impact of Aspergillus fumigatus allergen sensitivity on allergic rhinitis and asthma: a single center retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Aspergillus fumigatus (A.f) is a common aeroallergen that can cause diseases such as allergic asthma, allergic rhinitis, and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA).Aim: To investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with A.f sensitivity and allergic respiratory diseases in the Istanbul region of Turkey.Material and methods: Patients with allergic rhinitis and A.f sensitivity, and patients with allergic rhinitis and sensitivities other than A.f were included in the study.Comparisons were conducted between A.f sensitive and A.f non-sensitive patients in terms of severity of allergic asthma, severity of allergic rhinitis, rhinitis visual analogue symptom (VAS) symptom scores, asthma and allergic rhinitis treatment steps, asthma frequency and asthma control.Results: A total of 157 patients with allergic rhinitis were included in the study.The median (IQR) age of the patients was 33 (25-45), and 106 of them were female (67.5%).Severe asthma was more frequent in patients with A.f sensitivity than in patients with other allergen sensitivities (p < 0.001).Presence of A.f sensitivity was related to a lower asthma control score and higher asthma treatment step than presence of other allergen sensitivities (p = 0.029, p < 0.001, respectively).Additionally, VAS symptom scores for allergic rhinitis before and after treatment and allergic rhinitis medication scores were higher in patients with A.f sensitivity than in patients without A.f sensitivity (p < 0.001, p = 0.015, p > 0.001, respectively).Conclusions: A.f sensitivity is associated with severe respiratory allergies.Clinicians should closely monitor these patients and remain vigilant for treatment unresponsiveness, exacerbations, and the potential progression of the disease to more complex clinical conditions such as ABPA.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".