MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095022897 · doi:10.1159/000234322

Human Interleukin-3-Like Activity, Basophil and Eosinophil Growth Promoting Activities and Colony Stimulating Factor Derived from Several Cell Lines

2009· article· en· W2095022897 on OpenAlexaff
Yasuo Tanno, Beda M. Stadler, Judah A. Denburg

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Disorders and Syndromes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsEosinophilCell cultureBasophilBiologyImmunologyHaematopoiesisColony-stimulating factorCytokineInterleukin 5Molecular biologyInterleukinStem cellCell biologyAntibodyImmunoglobulin E

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human IL-3-like activity, colony stimulating factor (CSF) and basophil/eosinophil growth promoting activity (Ba/Eo GPA) in serum-free conditioned media (CM) derived from various cell lines of human origin were examined. Squamous cell carcinoma (Colo-16), osteogenic sarcoma (R97KL4) and human placental (HP) cells produced 10-20% IL-3 activity present in supernatants from a mouse myelomonocytic cell line (WEHI-3BCM) when assayed using a murine IL-3 dependent cell line (32Dcl/H4). The human T-cell leukemic cell line (Mo) and several neuroblastoma cell lines did not produce IL-3-like activity, nor did purified human erythroid potentiating activity (EPA) from Mo contain IL-3. CSF and Ba/Eo GPA were detected in CMs from Mo, HP, Colo-16 but not from R97KL4. No IL-2 activity was detected in any of these CMs. These observations point to the existence of diverse sources of human IL-3-like activity and to the probable distinctiveness of human IL-3, basophil or eosinophil GPA, and EPA. Analogies drawn between human and murine hemopoietic activities need to be made with caution.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of Allergy and Applied ImmunologySame topicEosinophilic Disorders and SyndromesFrench-language works237,207