MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391845545 · doi:10.1186/s13223-024-00876-w

Immune endotyping and gene expression profile of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in the aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) and the non-AERD subgroups

2024· article· en· W4391845545 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Javad Nazari, Faezeh Shahba, Negin Jafariaghdam, Saleh Mohebbi, Saba Arshi, Mohammad Hassan Bemanian, Morteza Fallahpour, Sima Shokri, Fatemeh Atashrazm, Saeed Amini, Maryam Roomiani, Pegah Babaheidarian, Majid Khoshmirsafa, Mohammad Nabavi

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIran University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsNasal polypsSinusitisMedicineImmunologyAsthmaAspirinImmune systemGATA3Immunoglobulin ERespiratory diseaseInternal medicineInterleukin 4GastroenterologyBiologyAntibodyGeneLungTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic Rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a paranasal sinus inflammatory disease and is divided into two subgroups defined as CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP). CRSwNP displays a T helper (Th)2 biased phenotype, and based on sensitivity or tolerance to aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), is further subdivided into Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) and non-AERD groups. Considering the challenge of diagnosis and treatment in patients with CRSwNP, particularly the AERD subtype, and the significance of endotyping in these patients, we examined the immune profile and endotyping based on gene expression analysis in the AERD and the non-AERD groups of patients with CRSwNP. MATERIAL AND METHOD: In this study, 21 patients were enrolled and were categorized into AERD (N = 10) and non-AERD (N = 11) groups based on their sensitivity to aspirin. After the special washing period, nasal polyps were biopsied in both groups, and the infiltration of eosinophils, neutrophils, plasma cells, and lymphocytes was compared between the AERD and the non-AERD groups. Also, gene expression levels of transcription factors including Tbet, GATA3, RoRγt, and FoxP3 and inflammatory cytokines including interleukin (IL)1β, IL1RAP (IL1 receptor accessory protein), IL2, IL4, IL5, IL10, IL13, IL17, TNFα, and IFNγ were investigated by quantitative Real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). Statistical analyses were performed using analytical tests including Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Mann-Whitney, and T-test. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The mean ± SD age of the studied groups was 37 ± 8.7 years old (21-50) for the AERD, and 40.4 ± 7.7 years old (31-52) for the non-AERD. LMS/EPOS/SNOT scores and pulmonary function tests showed no difference between the two groups. Serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels were found to be higher in patients with AERD (p = 0.04), however, the peripheral blood counts of eosinophils were comparable in the two groups. In the histopathologic analysis, the AERD group showed higher percentages of eosinophils (p = 0.04), neutrophils (p = 0.04), and plasma cells (p = 0.04) than the non-AERD group. Additionally, the gene expression levels of GATA3 (p = 0.001), IL4 (p = 0.04), IL5 (p = 0.007), and IL17 (p = 0.03) were significantly higher in the AERD than the non-AERD groups. CONCLUSION: Higher gene expression levels of GATA3, IL4, IL5, and IL17 were observed in the AERD group compared with the non-AERD group. These findings point to distinct patterns of inflammation in patients with AERD, with a predominance of Th2 inflammation.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical ImmunologySame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207