Human IgA inhibits adherence of<i>Acanthamoeba polyphaga</i>to epithelial cells and contact lenses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Specific anti-Acanthamoeba IgA antibodies have been detected in the serum and tears of patients and healthy individuals. However, the role of human secretory IgA antibodies in inhibiting the adherence of Acanthamoeba had not been previously investigated. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to purify secretory IgA from human colostrum and analyze its effect on the adherence of Acanthamoeba trophozoites to contact lenses and Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cells. IgA antibodies to Acanthamoeba polyphaga in colostrum of healthy women as well as in saliva and serum of healthy subjects were analyzed by ELISA and Western blot analysis. In serum, saliva, and colostrum, we detected IgA antibodies that recognized several antigens of A. polyphaga. In addition, colostrum and IgA antibodies purified from it inhibited adherence of A. polyphaga trophozoites to contact lenses and MDCK cells. These results suggest that IgA antibodies may participate in the resistance to the amoebic infection, probably by inhibiting the adherence of the trophozoites to contact lenses and corneal epithelial cells.
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) | 0.001 | 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".