Glomerular deposition of C1q and anti-C1q antibodies in mice following injection of antimouse C1q antibodies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anti-C1q autoantibodies are present in the serum of patients with different autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The occurrence of these autoantibodies correlates with renal involvement. In the present study we examined whether injection of rabbit antimouse C1q antibodies in mice leads to deposition in kidneys. Injection of healthy mice with a single dose of rabbit IgG antimouse C1q antibodies resulted in deposition of both C1q and IgG anti-C1q in glomeruli. The pattern of deposition observed in the glomeruli of mice injected with antimouse C1q antibodies both at 24 h and 2 weeks was both glomerular basement membrane (GBM)-associated and mesangial. Injection of control IgG did not have a detectable effect on circulating C1q levels, and no deposition of either C1q or rabbit IgG was seen at 24 h. The deposition of rabbit antimouse C1q and C1q in glomeruli resulted in complement activation, as assessed by C3 deposition, and influx of leucocytes associated with albuminuria in some, but not all mice. In none of the control mice was albuminuria observed. This report is the first to show that anti-C1q antibodies deposit in the healthy glomerulus together with autologous C1q. This deposition is stable for at least 2 weeks, causes complement activation, leucocyte influx and can lead to mild albuminuria.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".