CD36 and TLR Interactions in Inflammation and Phagocytosis: Implications for Malaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CD36 participates in macrophage internalization of a variety of particles, and has been implicated in inflammatory responses to many of these ligands. To what extent CD36 cooperates with other receptors in mediating these processes remains unclear. Because CD36 has been shown to cooperate with TLR2, we investigated the roles and interactions of CD36 and TLRs in inflammation and phagocytosis. Using Ab-induced endocytosis of CD36 and phagocytosis of erythrocytes displaying Abs to CD36, we show that selective engagement and internalization of this receptor did not lead to proinflammatory cytokine production by primary human and murine macrophages. In addition, CD36-mediated phagocytosis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria-parasitized erythrocytes (PEs), which contain parasite components that activate TLRs, also failed to induce cytokine secretion from primary macrophages. Furthermore, we demonstrate that CD36-mediated internalization did not require TLR2 or the TLR-signaling molecule IRAK4. However, macrophage pretreatment with TLR agonists markedly stimulated particle uptake via CD36. Similarly, PE uptake was unaffected by TLR deficiency, but in wild-type cells was increased by pretreatment with purified P. falciparum glycosylphosphatidylinositols, which activate TLR2. Our findings indicate that CD36 must cooperate with other receptors such as TLRs to participate in cytokine responses. Although purified P. falciparum components activate TLRs, CD36-mediated internalization of intact PEs is not inflammatory. Further, CD36 mediates internalization of particles, including PEs, independently of TLR signaling, but can functionally cooperate with TLRs to enhance internalization.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".