Stimulation of Human Eosinophilopoiesis by Hydrocortisone in vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Excess hydrocortisone (HC) evokes neutrophilia and eosinopenia in man. In addition, the hormone enhances human granulopoiesis in vitro at physiological as well as pharmacological concentrations. This study addressed the prospect that HC exerts opposite effects on the precursors of neutrophils and eosinophils, stimulating the former and inhibiting the latter. Experiments conducted on unseparated bone marrow (BM) cells demonstrated an increase in eosinophil clonogenesis in vitro with the addition of HC to the culture system. Secondary cultures, established from such primary harvests, revealed that HC had a direct impact on the clonogenic cells. Furthermore, administration of HC to normal subjects, at a dose which resulted in consistent eosinopenia, prompted an increase in the generation of eosinophil clones from peripheral blood cells ex vivo. Thus the hormone stimulates production of both neutrophils and eosinophils. Previous reports of opposite effects appear to have resulted from deficiencies of growth factors in the cell cultures. The contrasting effects of HC on neutrophil and eosinophil concentrations in the peripheral blood are more likely due to opposite effects on the distribution of these terminally differentiated cells in the circulation and extravascular tissues.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".