Impact of Erythrocyte Duffy Antigen Genetic Polymorphism on the Distribution of GroB-T, a Novel Human CXC Chemokine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Grobeta-T, a human CXC chemokine, has been studied for its potential to mobilize stem cells. Chemokines bind specifically to receptors on target immune cells but also to a homologous erythrocyte blood group antigen, the Duffy Antigen/Receptor for Chemokines (DARC)that is subject to genetic polymorphism in humans.A mutation in the DARC gene is common among African Americans and results in lack of expression of the erythrocyte antigen. We used a combination of in vitro studies of Grobeta-DARC interaction and pharmacokinetic simulation to anticipate the potential impact of this polymorphism on the pharmacokinetics of Grobeta-T. METHODS: [125I]Grobeta-T was incubated in Caucasian blood to characterize the concentration dependence of the blood to plasma concentration ratio (B/P). Affinity and capacity of binding was estimated by Scatchard analysis; specificity was investigated by competitive displacement with a CC chemokine. The B/P value (7 nM) was then determined in blood from 8 African American subjects. Duffy antigen expression was determined by antibody agglutination. A pharmacokinetic model was developed which accounted for blood-cell binding. Simulations were performed to explore effects of dose regimen and DARC expression on the Grobeta-T plasma concentration-time profile. RESULTS: Grobeta-T affinity and capacity for DARC (Caucasian blood)were 23.0 +/- 1.2 and 37.7 +/- 0.6 nM, respectively;excess CC chemokine fully displaced [125I]Grobeta-T. Chemokine binding was highly correlated with the presence or absence of the Duffy antigen (p<0.01) in African American blood; the proportion of subjects for which binding was observed (3/8), was consistent with the reported frequency of DARC expression in this population. Counter to intuition,in the terminal disposition phase at low doses,concentrations of free Grobeta-T in the presence of DARC may be substantially higher than in the absence of DARC. CONCLUSION: Dissociation from the erythrocyte antigen may lead to greater persistence, at low doses, of free Grobetabeta-T in the blood of individuals expressing the chemokine sink.
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 | 0.000 | 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".