Lipopolysaccharide glycotyping of clarithromycin-resistant and clarithromycin-susceptible Canadian isolates of<i>Helicobacter pylori</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) of Helicobacter pylori exhibits several unique structures, such as Lewis (Le) antigens, α-1,6-glucan, and dd-heptan. To investigate the relationship between LPS structure and resistance to clarithromycin, 41 Canadian isolates of H. pylori were characterized by whole-cell ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), sugar analysis, immunoblotting, and indirect immunofluorescence. The expression of type 2 Lewis X and (or) Lewis Y antigens was detected in 22 of 23 (95.7%) clarithromycin-resistant and in 14 of 18 (77.7%) clarithromycin-susceptible H. pylori strains (P < 0.05), and 8 isolates co-expressed type 1 and type 2 Le antigens (8/41, 19.5%). A significantly higher frequency of α-1,6-glucan (P < 0.01) was detected in clarithromycin-resistant strains than in clarithromycin-susceptible strains (19/23 (82.6%) versus 11/18 (61.1%)). Sugar analysis of selected α-1,6-glucan-positive H. pylori strains confirmed that they frequently contained elevated amounts of dd-heptose. Clarithromycin-resistant isolates were also characterized by low expression levels or absence of CagA (17/23, 73.9%). Indirect immunofluorescence studies carried out on selected H. pylori strains with rabbit immune sera specific for α-1,6-glucan confirmed broad recognition of α-1,6-glucan epitope. The binding was not affected by LPS glycotype of H. pylori isolates examined nor by their CagA status or resistance to clarithromycin. These findings suggest α-1,6-glucan as a potential vaccine target, especially in an era of increasing clarithromycin resistance in H. pylori.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".