» Articles » PMID: 37779521

Validation of AI-based Software for Objectification of Conjunctival Provocation Test

Overview
Date 2023 Oct 2
PMID 37779521
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Provocation tests are widely used in allergology to objectively reveal patients' sensitivity to specific allergens. The objective quantification of an allergic reaction is a crucial characteristic of these tests. Because of the absence of objective quantitative measurements, the conjunctival provocation test (CPT) is a less frequently used method despite its sensitivity and simplicity.

Objective: We developed a new artificial intelligence (AI)-based method, called AllergoEye, for quantitative evaluation of conjunctival allergic reactions and validated it in a clinical study.

Methods: AllergoEye was implemented as a 2-component system. The first component is based on an Android smartphone camera for screening and imaging the patient's eye, and the second is personal computer-based for image analysis and quantification. For the validation of AllergoEye, an open-label, prospective, monocentric study was carried out on 41 patients. Standardized CPT was performed with sequential titration of grass allergens in 4 dilutions, with the reaction evaluated by subjective/qualitative symptom scores and by quantitative AllergoEye scores.

Results: AllergoEye demonstrated high sensitivity (98%) and specificity (90%) as compared with human estimation of allergic reaction. Tuning cutoff thresholds allowed us to increase the specificity of AllergoEye to 97%, at which point the correlation between detected sensitivity to allergen and specific IgE carrier-polymer system class becomes obvious. Strikingly, such correlation was not found with sensitivity to allergen detected on the basis of subjective and qualitative symptom scores.

Conclusion: The clinical validation demonstrated that AllergoEye is a sensitive and efficient instrument for objective measurement of allergic reactions in CPT for clinical studies as well as for routine therapy control.

References
1.
Kleine-Tebbe J, Eickholt M, Gatjen M, Brunnee T, OConnor A, Kunkel G . Comparison between MAGIC LITE- and CAP-system: two automated specific IgE antibody assays. Clin Exp Allergy. 1992; 22(4):475-84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.1992.tb00150.x. View

2.
Dogan S, Astvatsatourov A, Deserno T, Bock F, Shah-Hosseini K, Michels A . Objectifying the conjunctival provocation test: photography-based rating and digital analysis. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2013; 163(1):59-68. DOI: 10.1159/000355333. View

3.
Petersson G, Dreborg S, INGESTAD R . Clinical history, skin prick test and RAST in the diagnosis of birch and timothy pollinosis. Allergy. 1986; 41(6):398-407. DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.1986.tb00319.x. View

4.
Shamji M, Kappen J, Akdis M, Jensen-Jarolim E, Knol E, Kleine-Tebbe J . Biomarkers for monitoring clinical efficacy of allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and allergic asthma: an EAACI Position Paper. Allergy. 2017; 72(8):1156-1173. DOI: 10.1111/all.13138. View

5.
Meyer K, Ostrenko O, Bourantas G, Morales-Navarrete H, Porat-Shliom N, Segovia-Miranda F . A Predictive 3D Multi-Scale Model of Biliary Fluid Dynamics in the Liver Lobule. Cell Syst. 2017; 4(3):277-290.e9. PMC: 8063490. DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2017.02.008. View