Fc‐Signalling in the Modulation of Immune Responses by Passive Antibody
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Passive antibody can both suppress and augment immune responses. Until recently, there was virtual unanimity on the importance of the interaction of the Fc portion of modulating antibody with Fc-receptors (Fc-signalling), especially in experiments involving the suppression by antibody. Experiments reported in the last few years, that do not demonstrate the range of Fc-portion/Fc-receptor influences on the suppression of immune responses by passive antibody, have introduced new uncertainty into this field. The purpose of this paper is to review how the initial controversy on the influence of Fc-signalling in inhibition by passive antibody was resolved. Old and new approaches are suggested that may help in resolving the current uncertainty engendered by recent experimental results that were interpreted to mean that passive suppressive antibody does not utilize the inhibitory FcgammaRIIB receptor. An understanding of the factors that influence negative Fc-signalling is needed in order to optimize clinical therapies whose action depends on the suppressive property of antibody.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".