Chronic Exposure to Innocuous Antigen in Sensitized Mice Leads to Suppressed Airway Eosinophilia That Is Reversed by Granulocyte Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we investigated the impact of chronic allergen exposure on airway inflammation and humoral responses in sensitized mice. We observed marked eosinophilia in the bronchoalveolar lavage, lung tissue, and peripheral blood after 2 wk of exposure. In contrast, eosinophilia was markedly reduced by 3 wk and completely resolved by 4 wk of exposure, despite the continued presence of Ag. Decreases in airway eosinophilia were associated with a robust humoral response. We observed that levels of OVA-specific IgE, IgG1, and IgG2a increased during the course of exposure. To assess whether continuous exposure to Ag impacts the ability of the lung to respond to subsequent Ag challenge, mice were exposed to either 2 or 4 wk of OVA in the context of GM-CSF. All groups were then rested for 28 days and exposed to OVA on three consecutive days. We observed a significant decrease in airway eosinophilia and IL-5 expression in the bronchoalveolar lavage and serum in mice initially exposed to 4 wk of OVA, compared with animals exposed to 2 wk only. However, in both groups expression of B7.2 on dendritic cells as well as CD25, CD69, and T1/ST2 on CD4(+) T cells was enhanced, suggesting immune activation. Delivery of rGM-CSF fully restored airway eosinophilia. This study shows that exposure to innocuous Ag alone does not lead to persistent eosinophilic airway inflammation, but rather to abrogated eosinophilia. This suppression can be reversed by GM-CSF.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".