MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

DISTINCT ROLES OF IL-10 IN REGULATION OF PEANUT ALLERGY (140.10)

2009· article· en· W1606273369 on OpenAlexaff
Larisa Lotoski, F. Estelle R. Simons, Joel Liem, Rishma Chooniesdass, Allan B. Becker, Kent T. HayGlass

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsWindsor Utilities Commission (Canada)Windsor Clinical ResearchUniversity of WindsorUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeanut allergyCytokineImmunologyAllergyAllergic responseStimulationFood allergyMedicineImmunoglobulin EAntibodyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the role of IL-10 in regulation of peanut-driven cytokine production in peanut allergic, sensitized, and clinically tolerant human populations. Methods: Eighteen clinically peanut allergic, 8 sensitized, and 29 peanut non-allergic individuals between 6-45y were studied. PBMC were stimulated with peanut Ag alone, and in the presence of rIL-10 or anti-IL-10R neutralising Ab in short-term primary cultures. Peanut-driven Type 1, Type 2, and regulatory cytokine response profiles were quantified by ELISA. Results: IL-10 production in response to peanut-specific stimulation was higher in peanut allergic than non-allergic individuals. Exogenous rIL-10 abrogates peanut-driven cytokine production in peanut allergics. Blocking endogenous IL-10 function has no impact on recall Type 2 cytokine responses in non-allergics. Among peanut allergics, anti-IL-10R treatment during Ag stimulation enhanced both Th2 and Th1 recall responses. Conclusion: IL-10 and the IL-10R play no detectable role in preventing initiation of peanut specific food allergy, but may be important in limiting the intensity of peanut specific Th2 and pro-inflammatory responses in peanut allergic individuals.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Immunology→Same topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research→French-language works237,207→