MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080480765 · doi:10.1182/blood-2004-05-1886

Monoclonal antibodies that mimic the action of anti-D in the amelioration of murine ITP act by a mechanism distinct from that of IVIg

2004· article· en· W2080480765 on OpenAlexaff
Seng Song, Andrew R. Crow, Vinayakumar Siragam, John Freedman, Alan H. Lazarus

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonoclonal antibodyAntibodyPolyclonal antibodiesImmunologyReceptorMononuclear phagocyte systemMechanism of actionFc receptorMonoclonalImmunoglobulin GImmune systemMedicineChemistryIn vitroInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanism of action of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) and polyclonal anti-D-mediated reversal of immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is still unclear. However, in a murine model of ITP, the therapeutic effect of IVIg appears to be wholly dependent upon the expression of the inhibitory Fc receptor, Fc gamma RIIB. We previously demonstrated that, similar to anti-D in humans, 2 erythrocyte-reactive monoclonal antibodies (TER119 and M1/69) ameliorated murine ITP and inhibited reticuloendothelial system (RES) function at doses that protected against thrombocytopenia. The current study evaluated the involvement of the inhibitory and activating Fc receptors, Fc gamma RIIB and Fc gamma RIIIA, respectively, in the TER119 and M1/69-mediated inhibition of thrombocytopenia. In contrast to IVIg, in Fc gamma RIIB-deficient mice, both monoclonal antibodies ameliorated ITP and both significantly down-regulated the level of expression of the activating Fc gamma RIIIA in splenic macrophages. These results indicate that anti-erythrocyte antibodies that ameliorate ITP act independently of Fc gamma RIIB expression but are dependent upon the activating Fc gamma RIIIA.

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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations60
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207