MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161915505 · doi:10.1189/jlb.0706435

Role of human neutrophil peptides in the initial interaction between lung epithelial cells and CD4+ lymphocytes

2007· article· en· W2161915505 on OpenAlexafffund
Rosanna Vaschetto, Jonathan Grinstein, Lorenzo Del Sorbo, Aye Aye Khine, Stefanos Voglis, Elizabeth Tullis, Arthur S. Slutsky, Haibo Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Leukocyte Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCystic Fibrosis Foundation
KeywordsCD80BiologyCD86Cell biologyInnate immune systemA549 cellCD28ImmunologyImmune systemMolecular biologyT cellCytotoxic T cellCD40CellIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human neutrophil peptides (HNP) exert immune-modulating effects. We hypothesized that HNP link innate and adaptive immunity through activation of costimulatory molecules. Human lung epithelial cells and CD4+ lymphocytes were treated with HNP separately or in coculture. Stimulation with HNP induced an increase in cell surface expression of CD54 (ICAM-1), CD80, and CD86 on lung epithelial cells and the corresponding major ligands, CD11a (LFA-1), CD152 (CTLA-4), and CD28 on CD4+ lymphocytes. There was an increased nuclear expression of the transcription factor p53 in human alveolar A549 cells and an elevated NF-kappaB (p50) and a degradation of I-kappaB protein in CD4+ lymphocytes following HNP stimulation. HNP enhanced the interaction between A549 cells and CD4+ lymphocytes by increasing cell adhesion and release of IFN-gamma, IL-2, and IL-8. This was attenuated by using an alpha1-proteinase inhibitor to neutralize HNP. We conclude that HNP play an important role in linking innate to acquired immunity by activation of costimulatory molecules in lung epithelial cells and CD4+ lymphocytes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Leukocyte BiologySame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207