Enhanced interleukin‐10 production by dendritic cells upon stimulation with Toll‐like receptor 4 agonists in systemic sclerosis that is possibly implicated in CCL18 secretion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that the T-cell attracting and profibrotic chemokine CCL18 might play a role in the pathogenesis of systemic sclerosis (SSc). However, it is unclear what underlies the higher CCL18 levels in SSc. The aim of our study was to determine whether Toll-like receptor (TLR)-mediated stimulation of monocytes and dendritic cells (DCs) contributes to the higher levels of CCL18 in SSc. METHODS: CCL18 levels were measured in 40 patients with SSc, primary Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) and healthy controls. The presence of TLR4 agonists in the circulation of SSc patients was investigated using TLR4 transgenic Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells. CCL18 and interleukin (IL)-10 secretion by monocytes/macrophages and monocyte-derived DCs (moDCs) was measured in the supernatant. The indirect effect of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated moDCs on CCL18 secretion by monocytes/macrophages was investigated using a transwell system. RESULTS: CCL18 levels were significantly elevated in SSc patients compared to patients with RP and healthy controls. SSc sera strongly induced CD25 expression on CHO cells genetically modified to express TLR4 but not on those expressing CD14 only. By contrast, serum from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients or healthy individuals did not have an effect. Neither monocytes/macrophages nor moDCs from SSc patients secreted higher levels of CCL18 compared to healthy controls. However, moDCs matured with the TLR4 ligand LPS from patients with SSc did secrete significantly higher amounts of IL-10 compared to those from healthy counterparts, which were IL-10 dependent. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that elevated CCL18 levels in SSc are not caused by an intrinsically enhanced CCL18 secretion by monocytes/macrophages but are, at least partly, orchestrated by an enhanced IL-10 secretion by TLR4-stimulated DCs. These observations suggest a role for TLR4 ligands and DCs in the pathogenesis of SSc, a topic that warrants further investigation.
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) | 0.002 | 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".