MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LPS inhibits ILC2 mediated type 2 immunity in the lung (IRC5P.625)

2015· article· en· W1432511929 on OpenAlexaff
Grace F. T. Poon, Fumio Takei

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicIL-33, ST2, and ILC Pathways
Canadian institutionsTerry Fox Research InstituteBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnate lymphoid cellImmunologyInflammationImmune systemLungImmunityAllergyAllergic inflammationMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The hygiene hypothesis states that the lack of early childhood exposure to infectious agents, which promotes type 1 immunity, results in increased incidents of allergy and asthma, which are predominantly type 2 immune responses. Recently identified group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) are essential for the development of protease allergen induced type 2 lung inflammation. To better understand how type 2 immunity is regulated, we tested the effect of LPS-induced type 1 inflammation on ILC2s and type 2 lung inflammation. Intranasal LPS pretreatment of mice suppressed both papain- and IL-33-induced ILC2 activation and eosinophilic lung inflammation. Specifically, the number of activated ILC2s that express IL-5 and IL-13 was decreased with LPS treatment. The LPS effect on ILC2s was dose and time dependent. The in vivo findings were reproduced in vitro. Pretreatment with LPS inhibited the production of type 2 cytokines IL-5 and IL-13 by ILC2s cultured in the presence of IL-33 and TSLP. These results indicate that LPS triggers an ILC2 inhibitory signal, which leads to the suppression of ILC2 activation and type 2 inflammation in the lung upon allergen exposure.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicIL-33, ST2, and ILC PathwaysFrench-language works237,207