Peanut allergen characterization and allergenicity throughout development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Peanut allergy (PA) in children is a major concern. There is a need for better biological material for both diagnosis and oral immunotherapy (OIT) treatments. The unique state of seeds at early reproductive stages may affect the allergenicity of storage proteins, and impact clinical diagnostic and OIT protocols. The objective of this study was to evaluate the major allergen content in sequential seed developmental stages and monitor allergenicity via specific IgE binding quantification and skin prick testing. Methods: Seeds were collected from peanut plants and sorted into five developmental stages: initial (S1), developing (S2), full-size without coloration (S3), full-size with coloration (S4), and fully mature (S5) seeds. Samples were characterized by RNA-Seq, ELISA, and immunohistochemistry. Lyophilized, ground preparations were used for evaluation of skin test responses in sixty challenge-proven PA children. Results: Gene expression, protein content, and specific IgE binding of allergenic proteins increased throughout seed maturation and development. An expression bias towards the less allergenic A-genome copy of the major allergen Ara h 2 was found in earlier stages, especially in stage S2. Immunohistochemical staining showed that Ara h 2 is more dispersed in the cell and less accumulated within organized bodies at stage S2 versus stage S4. Significant differences were found in mean wheal responses between the commercial peanut extract (equivalent to stage S5) and stages S1 and S2, but not with stage S4, upon skin prick testing in subjects with PA. Discussion: The observed decrease in peanut-specific IgE binding of immature peanut seeds may be a result not only of decreased amounts of allergenic proteins, but also of profound changes in seed composition and conformation. This may be significant for developing a safer and more effective peanut OIT protocol.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".