MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080174229 · doi:10.1096/fj.03-1230com

Improved survival in experimental sepsis with an orally administered inhibitor of apoptosis

2004· article· en· W2080174229 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Weaver, Mark S. Rouse, James M. Steckelberg, Andrew D. Badley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSepsisApoptosisPerforationCytokineMedicineImmunologyLymphocytePharmacologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pathophysiology of sepsis involves excessive lymphocyte apoptosis, which correlates with adverse outcomes, and disordered cytokine production, which may promote host injury. As the protease inhibitor (PI) class of antiretroviral agents is known to prevent apoptosis in vitro, we evaluated their effect on survival, lymphocyte apoptosis, and consequent cytokine production in mice with sepsis induced by cecal ligation and perforation. Mice pretreated with PIs have improved survival (67%; P<0.0005) compared with controls (17%) and a significant (P<0.05) reduction in lymphocyte apoptosis. Even mice receiving therapy beginning 4 h after perforation demonstrated improved survival (50%; P<0.05) compared with controls. PI therapy is also associated with an increase in the Th1 cytokine TNF-alpha (P<0.05) early in sepsis and a reduction in the Th2 cytokines IL-6 and IL-10 (P<0.05) late in sepsis; despite no intrinsic antibacterial effects, PI also reduced quantitative bacterial blood cultures. The beneficial effects of PI appear to be specific to lymphocyte apoptosis, as lymphocyte-deficient Rag1-/- mice did not experience benefit from treatment with PI. Thus, inhibition of lymphocyte apoptosis by PI is a candidate approach for the treatment of sepsis.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.283
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 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

Citations76
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207