Pattern recognition receptor-mediated cytokine response in infants across 4 continents⋆
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Susceptibility to infection as well as response to vaccination varies among populations. To date, the underlying mechanisms responsible for these clinical observations have not been fully delineated. Because innate immunity instructs adaptive immunity, we hypothesized that differences between populations in innate immune responses may represent a mechanistic link to variation in susceptibility to infection or response to vaccination. OBJECTIVE: Determine whether differences in innate immune responses exist among infants from different continents of the world. METHODS: We determined the innate cytokine response following pattern recognition receptor (PRR) stimulation of whole blood from 2-year-old infants across 4 continents (Africa, North America, South America, and Europe). RESULTS: We found that despite the many possible genetic and environmental exposure differences in infants across 4 continents, innate cytokine responses were similar for infants from North America, South America, and Europe. However, cells from South African infants secreted significantly lower levels of cytokines than did cells from infants from the 3 other sites, and did so following stimulation of extracellular and endosomal but not cytosolic PRRs. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences in innate cytokine responses to PRR stimulation exist among different populations of infants that could not have been predicted. Delineating the underlying mechanism(s) for these differences will not only aid in improving vaccine-mediated protection but possibly also provide clues for the susceptibility to infection in different regions of the world.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".