The Experts below are selected from a list of 321 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
G Pauli - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
recombinant allergen based Provocation testing
Methods, 2014Co-Authors: Verena Niederberger, Julia Eckldorna, G PauliAbstract:Over the last 25 years, recombinant allergens from all important allergen sources have been cloned and are now available as recombinant proteins. These molecules can be produced in practically unlimited amounts without biological or batch-to-batch variability. It has been shown in Provocation tests that recombinant allergens have similar clinical effects as their natural counterparts. With the help of these tools it is possible to reveal the precise reactivity profiles of patients and to uncover and differentiate cross-reactivity from genuine sensitization to an allergen source. Although it has been shown some time ago that it would be possible to replace crude allergen extracts with recombinant allergens for skin prick testing, and even though the use of allergen components can improve routine diagnosis, these tools are still not available for clinical routine applications. The use of Provocation tests is a crucial step in the development of new, hypoallergenic vaccines for therapy of allergic disease. Here we describe important Provocation methods (skin prick test, intradermal test, atopy patch test, nasal Provocation, colonoscopic Provocation test) and give an overview of the clinical Provocation studies which have been performed with recombinant allergens so far.
-
Provocation testing with recombinant allergens.
Methods, 2004Co-Authors: Marianne Van Hage-hamsten, G PauliAbstract:Abstract In the past few decades, DNA technology has enabled the production of defined recombinant allergen molecules for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. Recombinant allergens containing most of the relevant IgE epitopes present in natural allergen sources are now available and allergen proteins can be produced that are identical, without biological or batch-to-batch variation. A great advantage of recombinant allergens is that they can be used for component-resolved diagnostics, which makes it possible to establish the patient’s individual IgE reactivity profile before therapy is selected. However, before recombinant allergens can be applied in clinical practice their biological activity has to be carefully investigated in vivo. We here describe the most commonly used Provocation methods (skin tests (prick and intradermal), nasal, bronchial, and conjunctival Provocations) and how they can be performed. We also discuss the results so far obtained with in vivo testing using recombinant allergens and envisage their future use for immunotherapy.
Olle Löwhagen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Methacholine Provocations do not reveal sensitivity to strong scents
Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Eva Millqvist, Olle LöwhagenAbstract:Background It is common among patients with asthma to report sensitivity to strong scents. Provocations with methacholine are often used to verify this sensitivity. Objective To evaluate the significance of methacholine Provocations in asthmatic patients complaining about sensitivity to strong scents, we compared sensitivity to methacholine and reactions to Provocation with perfume. Methods Ten asthmatic patients having PC 20 less than 2 mg methacholine/mL were provoked with perfume or saline on four occasions. On two occasions, the patients wore a nose clip and underwent Provocations with perfume for 5 and 30 minutes, respectively. On one occasion, the patients were provoked with perfume but without a nose clip for five minutes. All patients were also subjected to Provocation with a placebo (saline). They were asked to estimate their sensitivity to strong scents in connections with symptoms of asthma. Results No changes in lung function occurred after any of the Provocations with perfume compared with the baseline or with placebo. Although all patients were very sensitive to methacholine, no relationship was found to their reported sensitivity to strong scents in connection with asthmatic symptoms. Conclusions In this study, asthmatic patients who were very sensitive to methacholine were not affected by Provocations with perfume. One may therefore question the value of Provocations with methacholine in patients complaining of symptoms after contact with strong scents.
-
Methacholine Provocations do not reveal sensitivity to strong scents
Annals of allergy asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Eva Millqvist, Olle LöwhagenAbstract:It is common among patients with asthma to report sensitivity to strong scents. Provocations with methacholine are often used to verify this sensitivity. To evaluate the significance of methacholine Provocations in asthmatic patients complaining about sensitivity to strong scents, we compared sensitivity to methacholine and reactions to Provocation with perfume. Ten asthmatic patients having a PC20 less than 2 mg methacholine/mL were provoked with perfume or saline on four occasions. On two occasions, the patients wore a nose clip and underwent Provocations with perfume for 5 and 30 minutes, respectively. On one occasion, the patients were provoked with perfume but without a nose clip for five minutes. All patients were also subjected to Provocation with a placebo (saline). They were asked to estimate their sensitivity to strong scents in connections with symptoms of asthma. No changes in lung function occurred after any of the Provocations with perfume compared with the baseline or with placebo. Although all patients were very sensitive to methacholine, no relationship was found to their reported sensitivity to strong scents in connection with asthmatic symptoms. In this study, asthmatic patients who were very sensitive to methacholine were not affected by Provocations with perfume. One may therefore question the value of Provocations with methacholine in patients complaining of symptoms after contact with strong scents.
Norman Miller - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Lashing Out after Stewing over Public Insults: The Effects of Public Provocation, Provocation Intensity, and Rumination on Triggered Displaced Aggression
Aggressive behavior, 2012Co-Authors: Eduardo A. Vasquez, William C. Pedersen, Brad J. Bushman, Nicholas J. Kelley, Philippine Demeestere, Norman MillerAbstract:Four studies present the first evidence showing that public (vs. private) Provocation augments triggered displaced aggression by increasing the perceived intensity of the Provocation. This effect is shown to be independent of face-saving motivation. Following a public or private Provocation, Study 1 participants were induced to ruminate or were distracted for 20 min. They then had an opportunity to aggress against another person who either acted in a neutral or mildly annoying fashion (viz. triggering event). As expected, the magnitude of the greater displaced aggression of those who ruminated before the triggering event compared with those distracted was greater under public than private Provocation. Study 2 replicated the findings of Study 1 and confirmed that public Provocations are experienced as more intense. Studies 3 and 4 both manipulated Provocation intensity directly to show that it mediated the moderating effect of public/private Provocation found in Study 1. The greater intensity of a public Provocation increases reactivity to a subsequent trigger, which in turn, augments triggered displaced aggression.
-
The moderating effect of trivial triggering Provocation on displaced aggression.
Journal of personality and social psychology, 2000Co-Authors: William C. Pedersen, Candace Gonzales, Norman MillerAbstract:Two studies examined the interaction between the presence or absence of (a) an initial Provocation and (b) a subsequent minor triggering action on the part of the target of displaced aggression. Consistent with the triggering event being seen by participants as indeed trivial when administered by itself without prior Provocation, exposure to it literally had no impact on aggression toward its source. When previously provoked, however, this subsequent triggering event strongly increased displaced aggression, causing it to reliably exceed both that displayed when there was no antecedent Provocation and that elicited by Provocation alone. Mediation analyses showed that for participants who had been provoked, subjective feelings of displeasure concerning the triggering event mediated the effect of the trigger on aggression.
-
gender differences in aggression as a function of Provocation a meta analysis
Psychological Bulletin, 1996Co-Authors: Ann B Bettencourt, Norman MillerAbstract:In this article, we meta-analytically examine experimental studies to assess the moderating effect of Provocation on gender differences in aggression. Convergent evidence shows that, whereas unprovoked men are more aggressive than women, Provocation markedly attenuates this gender difference. Gender differences in appraisals of Provocation intensity and fear of danger from retaliation (but not negative affect) partially mediate the attenuating effect of Provocation. However, they do not entirely account for its manipulated effect. Type of Provocation and other contextual variables also affect the magnitude of gender differences in aggression. The results support a social role analysis of gender differences in aggression and counter A. H. Eagly and V. Steffen's (see record 1987-10140-001) meta-analytic inability to confirm an attenuating effect of Provocation on gender differences in aggression. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
-
Gender differences in aggression as a function of Provocation: A meta-analysis.
Psychological bulletin, 1996Co-Authors: B. Ann Bettencourt, Norman MillerAbstract:In this article, we meta-analytically examine experimental studies to assess the moderating effect of Provocation on gender differences in aggression. Convergent evidence shows that, whereas unprovoked men are more aggressive than women, Provocation markedly attenuates this gender difference. Gender differences in appraisals of Provocation intensity and fear of danger from retaliation (but not negative affect) partially mediate the attenuating effect of Provocation. However, they do not entirely account for its manipulated effect. Type of Provocation and other contextual variables also affect the magnitude of gender differences in aggression. The results support a social role analysis of gender differences in aggression and counter A. H. Eagly and V. Steffen's (1986) meta-analytic inability to confirm an attenuating effect of Provocation on gender differences in aggression.
William C. Pedersen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Lashing Out after Stewing over Public Insults: The Effects of Public Provocation, Provocation Intensity, and Rumination on Triggered Displaced Aggression
Aggressive behavior, 2012Co-Authors: Eduardo A. Vasquez, William C. Pedersen, Brad J. Bushman, Nicholas J. Kelley, Philippine Demeestere, Norman MillerAbstract:Four studies present the first evidence showing that public (vs. private) Provocation augments triggered displaced aggression by increasing the perceived intensity of the Provocation. This effect is shown to be independent of face-saving motivation. Following a public or private Provocation, Study 1 participants were induced to ruminate or were distracted for 20 min. They then had an opportunity to aggress against another person who either acted in a neutral or mildly annoying fashion (viz. triggering event). As expected, the magnitude of the greater displaced aggression of those who ruminated before the triggering event compared with those distracted was greater under public than private Provocation. Study 2 replicated the findings of Study 1 and confirmed that public Provocations are experienced as more intense. Studies 3 and 4 both manipulated Provocation intensity directly to show that it mediated the moderating effect of public/private Provocation found in Study 1. The greater intensity of a public Provocation increases reactivity to a subsequent trigger, which in turn, augments triggered displaced aggression.
-
understanding impulsive aggression angry rumination and reduced self control capacity are mechanisms underlying the Provocation aggression relationship
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2011Co-Authors: Thomas F Denson, William C. Pedersen, Malte Friese, Aryun Hahm, Lynette RobertsAbstract:Interpersonal Provocation is a common and robust antecedent to aggression. Four studies identified angry rumination and reduced self-control as mechanisms underlying the Provocation—aggression relationship. Following Provocation, participants demonstrated decreased self-control on an unpleasant task relative to a control condition (Study 1). When provoked, rumination reduced self-control and increased aggression. This effect was mediated by reduced self-control capacity (Study 2). State rumination following Provocation, but not anger per se, mediated the effect of trait rumination on aggression (Study 3). Bolstering self-regulatory resources by consuming a glucose beverage improved performance on a measure of inhibitory control following rumination (Study 4). These findings suggest that rumination following an anger-inducing Provocation reduces self-control and increases aggression. Bolstering self-regulatory resources may reduce this adverse effect.
-
The moderating effect of trivial triggering Provocation on displaced aggression.
Journal of personality and social psychology, 2000Co-Authors: William C. Pedersen, Candace Gonzales, Norman MillerAbstract:Two studies examined the interaction between the presence or absence of (a) an initial Provocation and (b) a subsequent minor triggering action on the part of the target of displaced aggression. Consistent with the triggering event being seen by participants as indeed trivial when administered by itself without prior Provocation, exposure to it literally had no impact on aggression toward its source. When previously provoked, however, this subsequent triggering event strongly increased displaced aggression, causing it to reliably exceed both that displayed when there was no antecedent Provocation and that elicited by Provocation alone. Mediation analyses showed that for participants who had been provoked, subjective feelings of displeasure concerning the triggering event mediated the effect of the trigger on aggression.
Eva Millqvist - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Methacholine Provocations do not reveal sensitivity to strong scents
Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Eva Millqvist, Olle LöwhagenAbstract:Background It is common among patients with asthma to report sensitivity to strong scents. Provocations with methacholine are often used to verify this sensitivity. Objective To evaluate the significance of methacholine Provocations in asthmatic patients complaining about sensitivity to strong scents, we compared sensitivity to methacholine and reactions to Provocation with perfume. Methods Ten asthmatic patients having PC 20 less than 2 mg methacholine/mL were provoked with perfume or saline on four occasions. On two occasions, the patients wore a nose clip and underwent Provocations with perfume for 5 and 30 minutes, respectively. On one occasion, the patients were provoked with perfume but without a nose clip for five minutes. All patients were also subjected to Provocation with a placebo (saline). They were asked to estimate their sensitivity to strong scents in connections with symptoms of asthma. Results No changes in lung function occurred after any of the Provocations with perfume compared with the baseline or with placebo. Although all patients were very sensitive to methacholine, no relationship was found to their reported sensitivity to strong scents in connection with asthmatic symptoms. Conclusions In this study, asthmatic patients who were very sensitive to methacholine were not affected by Provocations with perfume. One may therefore question the value of Provocations with methacholine in patients complaining of symptoms after contact with strong scents.
-
Methacholine Provocations do not reveal sensitivity to strong scents
Annals of allergy asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy Asthma & Immunology, 1998Co-Authors: Eva Millqvist, Olle LöwhagenAbstract:It is common among patients with asthma to report sensitivity to strong scents. Provocations with methacholine are often used to verify this sensitivity. To evaluate the significance of methacholine Provocations in asthmatic patients complaining about sensitivity to strong scents, we compared sensitivity to methacholine and reactions to Provocation with perfume. Ten asthmatic patients having a PC20 less than 2 mg methacholine/mL were provoked with perfume or saline on four occasions. On two occasions, the patients wore a nose clip and underwent Provocations with perfume for 5 and 30 minutes, respectively. On one occasion, the patients were provoked with perfume but without a nose clip for five minutes. All patients were also subjected to Provocation with a placebo (saline). They were asked to estimate their sensitivity to strong scents in connections with symptoms of asthma. No changes in lung function occurred after any of the Provocations with perfume compared with the baseline or with placebo. Although all patients were very sensitive to methacholine, no relationship was found to their reported sensitivity to strong scents in connection with asthmatic symptoms. In this study, asthmatic patients who were very sensitive to methacholine were not affected by Provocations with perfume. One may therefore question the value of Provocations with methacholine in patients complaining of symptoms after contact with strong scents.