MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077263559 · doi:10.1080/08916930802587950

AEB-071 has minimal impact on onset of autoimmune diabetes in NOD mice

2009· article· en· W2077263559 on OpenAlexaff
Shaheed Merani, Ryan Edgar, Christian Toso, Juliet Emamaullee, Aducio Thiesen, A. M. James Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenueAutoimmunity · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsulitisNodNOD miceAutoimmune diseaseAutoimmunityDiabetes mellitusMedicinePancreatic isletsImmunologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyProtein kinase CType 1 diabetesImmune systemAntibodyKinaseBiologyIsletCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protein kinase C (PKC) is an important signaling enzyme in the activation and regulation of T lymphocytes. T-cell-mediated destruction of beta-cells is a characteristic feature of autoimmune (Type 1) diabetes. Here we explore the ability of PKC inhibition, using the PKC inhibitor AEB-071 (AEB), to reduce disease in two animal models of spontaneous autoimmune diabetes (non-obese diabetic (NOD) mouse and biobreeding rat (BB)). NOD mice were treated with AEB for 4 weeks, starting at either 4 weeks of age (prior to the development of insulitis) or at 8 weeks of age, once insulitis is present. Animals treated with AEB during the effector phase of the disease (treatment onset at 8 weeks of age), showed a 2-week delay in diabetes onset (p < 0.05). In these animals, the extent of insulitis was lower than in vehicle-treated controls; however, neither serum autoimmune anti-GAD65 antibody levels nor pancreatic insulin content were different between experimental groups. Overall, inhibition of PKC can mildly reduce lymphocytic infiltrate of pancreatic islets and modestly delay onset of autoimmune diabetes in NOD mice. AEB, a T-cell-targeted immunosuppressive strategy, is only sufficient as a monothereapy to modestly delay onset of autoimmune disease in the NOD mouse.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutoimmunitySame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207