<i>In vitro</i> interaction between silicone gel and human monocyte‐macrophages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controversy remains regarding the ability of silicone materials to induce a specific immune reaction versus a nonspecific inflammatory response. Histopathological analysis of the tissue around failed breast implants reveals chronic inflammation with silicone gel droplets either surrounded by giant cells or engulfed by macrophages, areas of fibrosis, and necrosis. Macrophages are the key cells engulfing or forming foreign body giant cells. To address the mechanisms of silicone-induced inflammation a model of human monocyte-derived macrophages (MDMs) was developed. After sonication of silicone gel, the silicone droplets were embedded in Type I collagen and used to coat glass coverslips; human MDMs were subsequently seeded on the coverslips and maintained in culture for up to 7 days. The advantage of the model was that human macrophages could be studied histologically, and cytochemically as they interacted with well-characterized silicone materials. Initial analysis of the human macrophages shows phagocytosis of the silicone gel within hours of exposure to the material. Analysis for pro-inflammatory cytokines reveals significant transient secretion of IL-1 (p < 0.01) over controls by human macrophages upon exposure to silicone gel at 24 h.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".