Characterizing the symptomatology and pathophysiology of allergic rhinitis using a nasal allergen challenge model – a subset of the allergic rhinitis microbiome study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since 2015, our nasal allergen challenge (NAC) protocol has been used to investigate the pathophysiology of allergic rhinitis (AR) with various allergens. However, we have yet to publish a comprehensive examination of the pathophysiology associated with AR to ragweed pollen. METHODS: Nineteen ragweed pollen allergic and 12 healthy (nonallergic) control participants from Kingston, Ontario, Canada, completed the NAC to ragweed pollen extract out-of-season. Total nasal symptom score (TNSS) and percent fall in peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) were collected up to 48 h post-exposure. Nasal fluid and serum samples were collected post-exposure, and white blood cell differential counts, serum ragweed-specific and total immunoglobulin-E (IgE), and nasal cytokine concentrations were analyzed. Statistical tests were performed using GraphPad Prism 10.4.0. RESULTS: The mean TNSS and percent PNIF fall from baseline were significantly higher in participants with ragweed pollen allergy compared to nonallergic controls up to 24 h (P ≤ 0.05) and 12 h (P ≤ 0.05) post-NAC, respectively. Nasal eosinophils significantly increased in allergic participants at 6 h (P = 0.0010) and 24 h (P = 0.0049), while peripheral blood eosinophil percentages decreased significantly at 6 h compared to baseline (P = 0.0499). The specific to total IgE ratio for allergic participants significantly increased 1 h and 24 h (P = 0.0022 and P = 0.0034, respectively) post-NAC, with a decrease at 6 h compared to both 1 h and 24 h (P = 0.0224 and P = 0.0316, respectively). Allergic and nonallergic participants had significantly different cytokine profiles, particularly IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-13, MIP-1β, and TNF-α. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the effectiveness of our NAC protocol in eliciting clinical and biological responses in ragweed-allergic participants, particularly highlighting eosinophil activity, IgE, and cytokine dynamics. Future research should investigate the roles of specific IgE, IL-4, and eosinophil activation in allergic inflammation. Additionally, this NAC study population provides a strong foundation for examining the nasal microbiome in AR. Longitudinal studies exploring the relationship between allergic responses and microbiome shifts could offer deeper insights into the underlying mechanisms of disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".