MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064277024 · doi:10.1093/annhyg/46.suppl_1.433

TNFα Increases Binding of Air Pollutant Particles to Tracheal Epithelial Cells: Possible Role of ICAM-1

2002· article· en· W2064277024 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Occupational Hygiene · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsICAM-1PollutantTumor necrosis factor alphaAir pollutantsEnvironmental scienceChemistryEnvironmental chemistryCell biologyAir pollutionBiologyImmunologyCell adhesion molecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exposure of alveolar macrophages (MAC) to particulates frequently results in the production of tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα). We have previously shown that TNFα increases the binding of amosite asbestos to tracheal epithelial cells and that this process proceeds via an NF-κ Bdependent mechanism. To examine whether TNFα affects binding of compact particles and air pollutant particles (PM) as well, we exposed rat tracheal explants to various concentrations of TNFα followed by Ottawa PM 10 , ROFA or fine TiO 2 . Using scanning electron microscopy, TNFα increased particle binding of all three species. This process could be partially prevented by cycloheximide, deferoxamine and tetramethylthiourea. The phosphotidyl-choline-related phospholipase C inhibitor, D609 and anti-ICAM antibody completely abolished the increase in binding. We conclude that TNFα is able to increase epithelial binding of PM particles to epithelial cells. Active oxygen species appear to play a role in binding, and TNFα-enhanced binding may be mediated through increases in ICAM-1 cell surface protein. Increased particle binding probably increases particle internalization and adverse molecular responses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of Occupational HygieneSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207