Increased detection of interleukin-;5 in sputum by addition of protease inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The measurement of interleukin (IL)-5 in sputum is problematic, with interfering factors affecting immunoassay. The authors investigated whether sputum proteases could be acting as interfering factors by studying the effect of protease inhibitors (PI) on sputum IL-5 measurement. Induced sputa from 20 subjects with asthma were divided into aliquots, processed with and without protease inhibitors (in low and high concentrations) and the levels of IL-5 (spiked and endogenous) measured by enzyme immunoassay were compared. The concentration of sputum IL-5 was significantly increased by PI, with median (interquartile range) levels processed with no, low and high PI concentrations being 0 (0), 41.8 (75.6) and 66.1 (124.4) pg x mL(-1), respectively. There was also a significant increase in percentage recovery of spiked IL-5. Although high concentrations of PI reduced cell viability, there was no effect on total or differential cell counts and low concentrations of PI had no effect on cell counts or viability. Levels of endogenous interleukin-5 in sputum of asthmatic subjects can be significantly increased by the addition of protease inhibitors, and samples which would be regarded as negative for interleukin-5 without protease inhibitors may instead have considerable amounts of interleukin-5 detected.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".