Evidence for Local Eosinophil Differentiation Within Allergic Nasal Mucosa: Inhibition with Soluble IL-5 Receptor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eosinophil differentiation occurs within the bone marrow in response to eosinopoietic cytokines, particularly IL-5. Recently, however, eosinophil precursors (CD34/IL-5Ralpha+ cells) and IL-5 mRNA+ cells have been identified within the lungs of asthmatics, indicating that a population of eosinophils may differentiate in situ. In this report, we examined the presence of eosinophil precursors within allergic nasal mucosa and examined whether they undergo local differentiation following ex vivo stimulation. We cultured human nasal mucosa obtained from individuals with seasonal allergic rhinitis with either specific allergen, recombinant human IL-5 (rhIL-5), or allergen + soluble IL-5Ralpha (sIL-5Ralpha), shown to antagonize IL-5 function. Simultaneous immunocytochemistry and in situ hybridization demonstrated that there were fewer cells coexpressing CD34 immunoreactivity and IL-5Ralpha mRNA following culture with allergen or rhIL-5, compared with medium alone. Immunostaining revealed that the number of major basic protein (MBP) immunoreactive cells (eosinophils) was higher within tissue stimulated with allergen or rhIL-5, compared with unstimulated tissue. In situ hybridization detected an increase in IL-5 mRNA+ cells in sections from tissue cultured with allergen, compared with medium alone. These effects were not observed in tissue cultured with a combination of allergen and sIL-5Ralpha. Colocalization analysis indicated this expression to be mainly, but not exclusively, T cell (44%) and eosinophil (10%) derived. Our findings suggest that a subset of eosinophils may differentiate locally within allergic nasal mucosa, in what appears to be a highly IL-5-dependent fashion, and imply that this process might be regulated in vivo by endogenous production of sIL-5Ralpha.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".