Enhanced Chemokine Receptor Expression on Leukocytes of Patients with Alzheimer's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although primarily a neurological complaint, systemic inflammation is present in Alzheimer's Disease, with higher than normal levels of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in the periphery as well as the brain. A gradient of these factors may enhance recruitment of activated immune cells into the brain via chemotaxis. Here, we investigated the phenotypes of circulating immune cells in AD patients with multi-colour flow cytometry to determine whether their expression of chemokine receptors is consistent with this hypothesis. In this study, we confirmed our previously reported data on the shift of early- to late-differentiated CD4+ T-cells in AD patients. The percentage of cells expressing CD25, a marker of acute T-cell activation, was higher in patients than in age-matched controls, and percentages of CCR6+ cells were elevated. This chemokine receptor is primarily expressed on pro-inflammatory memory cells and Th17 cells. The proportion of cells expressing CCR4 (expressed on Th2 cells) and CCR5 (Th1 cells and dendritic cells) was also greater in patients, and was more pronounced on CD4+ than CD8+ T-cells. These findings allow a more detailed insight into the systemic immune status of patients with Alzheimer's disease and suggest possible novel targets for immune therapy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".