Elevated antibody response by antigen presentation in immune complexes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Active immunization techniques against exogenous source antigens (ags - such as bacteria, virus) proved to be successful in preventing many acute infectious diseases from occurring in a susceptible population. However, an active immunization technique that could be employed both prophylactically and therapeutically has so far not been described. We have developed a new vaccination technique that employs specific immune complex (IC) containing components which is able to redirect immune-response outcomes in both preventative and curative regimens in an experimental autoimmune kidney disease. The technique with appropriate modifications was assessed using an exogenous ag in our present experiment. MATERIAL/METHODS: We prepared an exogenous ag on a HiTrap affinity column and injected it by five different vaccination techniques into rats. Antibody (ab) responses against the ag were evaluated by ELISA. Statistical analysis assessed possible significant differences in ab responses. RESULTS: The most powerful immune response was initiated following intraperitoneal (IP) injections of normal rabbit immunoglobulin G (nRIgG) in Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA). The second most powerful immune response was evoked when the same ag (nRIgG) was injected in the form of IC at ag excess. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Induction of a powerful ab response, without the use of an adjuvant, can be achieved in rats injected with ICs. 2. IC is non-toxic, non-irritant, and able to initiate the production of the same class of immunoglobulin with the same specificity/function that resides in the inoculum.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; 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".