Cutaneous basophil infiltration in atopic dermatitis is associated with abundant epidermal infiltration of helper T cells: A preliminary retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a heterogenous inflammatory skin disorder. Our previous study revealed that basophil infiltration in skin is observed in approximately 60% of AD cases. However, the clinical and histological characteristics of AD associated with basophil infiltration remain unclear. We examined basophil infiltration by immunohistochemical staining of 38 specimens from 34 patients who underwent skin biopsies to diagnose AD from April 2016 to September 2021 at Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital. The patients/specimens were divided into two groups, 17 patients/21 specimens associated with little or no basophil infiltration (basophil‐low group) and 17 patients/17 specimens associated with marked basophil infiltration (basophil‐high group). The clinical characteristics of the patients (age, sex, complications, blood biomarkers, skin symptoms, and treatment) and histological features of the specimens were compared between the groups. Basophil‐high patients were significantly younger than basophil‐low patients. Blood basophil counts were higher in basophil‐high patients than in basophil‐low patients. CD4+ T‐cell infiltration was more marked in basophil‐high specimens than in basophil‐low specimens. CD4+ T cells infiltrated into the dermis as well as into the epidermis only in the basophil‐high specimens. Thus, basophil‐high AD can be characterized by skin lesions associated with abundant helper T‐cell infiltration in younger patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".