Synergistic effects of RAD and Neoral in inhibition of host‐vs.‐graft and graft‐vs.‐host immune responses in rat small‐bowel transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The combined effects of RAD and Neoral were tested in a rat orthotopic small-bowel transplantation model. Seven groups (n = 6) were involved in this study, and each one was included in three rejection models for the evaluation of host-vs.-graft disease (HVG) (LBN-F1 to LEW), graft-vs.-host disease (GVH) (LEW to LBN-F1), and combined HVG and GVH immune responses (BN to LEW). Both drugs were administered orally throughout the study. Low doses of RAD (1.0-2.5 mg/kg/day) combined with Neoral (2.0-5.0 mg/kg/day) produced strong synergistic effects in the prolongation of small-bowel graft survival in HVG (combination index, CI = 0.095, 0.1212), GVH (CI = 0.027, 0.020), and combined HVG and GVH immune responses (CI = 0.070, 0.301). The combination therapy of RAD and Neoral produces a strong synergistic effect toward the inhibition of HVG, GVH, and combined HVG and GVH immune responses in a rat small-bowel transplantation model.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".