Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) inhibit B cell-mediate antigen presentation (78.35)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract IVIg are therapeutic preparations of IgG prepared from the plasma of thousands of donors and are currently used to treat more than one hundred autoimmune or inflammatory diseases, though their mechanisms of action are not precisely known in any of these diseases. Previous work from our laboratory done on human B cells revealed that IVIg interact with MHC class I and II molecules. These interactions led us to hypothesize that IVIg might interfere with B cell-mediated antigen presentation. In the present work, we used an in vitro antigen presentation system with an OVA-specific T cell line (DO11.10) and showed that IVIg inhibited OVA presentation by B cells. IVIg did not decrease OVA internalization or MHC II expression on B cells, suggesting that IVIg inhibited antigen presentation by interfering with either antigen processing or loading of peptides on MHC II molecules. We further showed, using the OVA peptide 323-339 specific for the TCR expressed by DO11.10 T cells which can be loaded directly on MHC II molecules, that IVIg significantly reduced OVA 323-339 presentation, suggesting that the mechanism by which IVIg inhibit OVA presentation by B cells is by competing for peptide occupancy of MHC II molecules. This study extends our previous observations on the spontaneous internalization of IVIg inside living cells by showing a measurable effect of internalized IVIg on the normal cellular process of antigen presentation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".