MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976973807 · doi:10.1139/y02-116

Peripheral blood mononuclear cell production of TNF-α in response to North American ginseng stimulation

2002· article· en· W1976973807 on OpenAlexaffvenue
David L Zhou, David D. Kitts

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGinseng Biological Effects and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMinisterstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy
KeywordsPeripheral blood mononuclear cellGinsengTumor necrosis factor alphaStimulationImmune systemImmunologyMedicinePharmacologyCytokineAraliaceaeBiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicineIn vitroChemistryBiochemistryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

North American ginseng (Panax quinquefolium) root extract (NAGE) with known ginsenosides composition was examined for its affinity to stimulate human tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) production in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Case studies were conducted in three donors, one that was diagnosed with an atopic allergy and two that were normal, healthy subjects. Cultured mononuclear cells were incubated with varying concentrations of NAGE for up to 72 h and culture media were tested for TNF-alpha concentration. Direct stimulation of mononuclear cell TNF-alpha production in vitro by NAGE occurred as early as 6 h with 200 microg NAGE/mL. The stimulation of TNF-alpha production was confirmed by TNF-alpha mRNA gene expression. These interesting results show the immunostimulating activity of NAGE components in reference to TNF-alpha production. This observation requires further investigation with more subjects to determine the affinity of ginseng in stimulating the human immune system. Moreover, the method of evaluating this response is very useful for standardizing ginseng extracts to a known bioactivity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicGinseng Biological Effects and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207