The House Dust Mite Allergen Der p 1, Unlike Der p 3, Stimulates the Expression of Interleukin-8 in Human Airway Epithelial Cells via a Proteinase-activated Receptor-2-independent Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated and compared the mechanisms by which two dust mite proteolytic allergens, Der p 1 and Der p 3, and a peptide agonist of proteinase-activated receptor 2 (PAR(2)AP) trigger interleukin (IL)-8 release from human pulmonary epithelial cells (A549). Although all three stimuli tested induced the up-regulation of IL-8 (mRNA and protein), the Der p 1-mediated signaling events did not exactly match those induced by PAR(2)AP and Der p 3. First, Der p 1 was less effective in stimulating IL-8 gene transcriptional activity than PAR(2)AP and Der p 3. Second, Der p 1-mediated IL-8 expression was mainly dependent on NF-kappaB, whereas Der p 3 and PAR(2)AP regulated IL-8 expression through the activation of both NF-kappaB and AP-1. Third, although all three MAP kinases, ERK1/2, p38, and JNK, were activated, Der p 1 induced IL-8 release exclusively via the ERK1/2 signaling pathway, whereas PAR(2)AP and Der p 3 also involved the other kinases. Fourth, in HeLa cells, Der p 1 was able to up-regulate IL-8 secretion independent of PAR(2) expression, and in contrast with PAR(2)AP and Der p 3, Der p 1 was unable to affect calcium signaling via PAR(2) in PAR(2)-expressing KNRK cells. Finally, cleavage by Der p 1 of a synthetic peptide representing the N-terminal activation-cleavage site of PAR(2) did not release a high potency activator of PAR(2) as does Der p 3. We conclude that Der p 1 (but not Der p 3)-induced IL-8 production in A549 epithelial cells is independent of PAR(2) activation.
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) | 0.001 | 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".