Comparison of polarization properties of human adult microglia and blood‐derived macrophages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both microglia, the resident myeloid cells of the CNS parenchyma, and infiltrating blood-derived macrophages participate in inflammatory responses in the CNS. Macrophages can be polarized into M1 and M2 phenotypes, which have been linked to functional properties including production of inflammation association molecules and phagocytic activity. We compare phenotypic and functional properties of microglia derived from the adult human CNS with macrophages derived from peripheral blood monocytes in response to M1 and M2 polarizing conditions. Under M1 conditions, microglia and macrophages upregulate expression of CCR7 and CD80. M2 treatment of microglia-induced expression of CD209 but not additional markers CD23, CD163, and CD206 expressed by M2 macrophages. M1-polarizing conditions induced production of IL-12p40 by both microglia and macrophages; microglia produced higher levels of IL-10 under M1 conditions than did macrophages. Under M2 conditions, microglia ± LPS produced comparable levels of IL-10 under M1 conditions whereas IL-10 was induced by LPS in M2 macrophages. Myelin phagocytosis was greater in microglia than macrophages under all conditions; for both cell types, activity was higher for M2 cells. Our findings delineate distinctive properties of microglia compared with exogenous myeloid cells in response to signals derived from an inflammatory environment in the CNS.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".