Effect of α4-Integrin Blockade on CD4+ Cell-driven Late Airway Responses in the Rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The blockade of alpha4 integrins with a monoclonal antibody (TA-2) decreases late airway responses (LR) in ovalbumin (OVA)-sensitized and challenged rats. In this study, we used a model of CD4+ cell-driven LR to test the hypothesis that alpha4-integrin blockade involves interference with T-cell activation in the inhibition of LR. Purified CD4+ cells from OVA-sensitized rats were transferred to unsensitized recipients, which received either TA-2 or a control antibody (cAb), and were OVA-challenged. A sham-challenged group was also studied. LR, calculated from pulmonary resistance after challenge, were reduced in the TA-2 group compared with the cAb group (p = 0.015). Total cell counts, macrophages, neutrophils, and lymphocytes in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), and CD3+ cells in airway sections, were unaffected. The cAb group had higher numbers of cells expressing interleukin-5 (IL-5) mRNA (55.2 +/- 3.39 cells/1,000, mean +/- SEM) and major basic protein (MBP) (6.2 +/- 0.4/100 cells) in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), than the TA-2 group (25.37 +/- 2.41 IL-5+ and 2.7 +/- 0.2 MBP+) and the sham group (12.37 +/- 0.96 IL-5+, 1.7 +/- 0.1 MBP+). Interferon gamma (IFN-gamma) mRNA+ cells were downregulated in both OVA-challenged groups, compared with the sham group. Our results suggest that the attenuation of LR and eosinophilia by alpha4-integrin blockade may involve interference with CD4+ cell activation and IL-5 expression.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".