MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CXCR3 chemokine receptor signaling mediates itch in experimental allergic contact dermatitis

2015· article· en· W2041373750 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lintao Qu, Kai‐Yuan Fu, Jennifer Yang, Steven G. Shimada, Robert H. LaMotte

Bibliographic record

VenuePain · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAmgen
KeywordsCXCL10CXCR3Dorsal root ganglionImmunologyMedicineAllergic contact dermatitisChemokine receptorChemokineNeuroscienceBiologyInflammationSensory systemAllergy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Persistent itch is a common symptom of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and represents a significant health burden. The chemokine CXCL10 is predominantly produced by epithelial cells during ACD. Although the chemokine CXCL10 and its receptor CXCR3 are implicated in the pathophysiology of ACD, it is largely unexplored for itch and pain accompanying this disorder. Here, we showed that CXCL10 and CXCR3 mRNA, protein, and signaling activity were upregulated in the dorsal root ganglion after contact hypersensitivity (CHS), a murine model of ACD, induced by squaric acid dibutylester. CXCL10 directly activated a subset of cutaneous dorsal root ganglion neurons innervating the area of CHS through neuronal CXCR3. In behavioral tests, a CXCR3 antagonist attenuated spontaneous itch- but not pain-like behaviors directed to the site of CHS. Injection of CXCL10 into the site of CHS elicited site-directed itch- but not pain-like behaviors, but neither type of CXCL10-evoked behaviors was observed in control mice. These results suggest that CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling mediates allergic itch but not inflammatory pain in the context of skin inflammation. Thus, upregulation of CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling in sensory neurons may contribute to itch associated with ACD. Targeting the CXCL10/CXCR3 signaling might be beneficial for the treatment of allergic itch.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations88
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePainSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207