Differential Antigen-presenting B Cell Phenotypes from Synovial Microenvironment of Patients with Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the qualitative and quantitative phenotypic changes that occur in molecules involved in antigen presentation and costimulation in synovial B cells from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: The presence of HLA-DR, CD86, and CD40 in CD20+ cells was studied in RA synovium biopsies using immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence. Expression was assessed by flow cytometry of the Class II molecules CD40, CD86, CD23, and CD27 on B cells from the synovial fluid (SF), with respect to peripheral blood, from 13 patients with RA and 15 patients with PsA. Expression of interferon-induced protein with tetratricopeptide repeats 4 (IFIT4) in immune-selected CD20+ cells from patients with RA was assessed by quantitative realtime PCR. RESULTS: Infiltrating synovial RA, B cells expressed HLA-DR, CD40, and CD86. Increased expression of CD86, HLA-DR, and HLA-DQ in B cells from SF was found in patients with RA and PsA. HLA-DP was also elevated in rheumatoid SF B cells; conversely, a significantly lower expression was observed in SF from patients with PsA. CD40 expression was increased in SF B cells from PsA, but not in patients with RA. Interestingly, CD20 surface expression level was significantly lower in SF B cells (CD19+, CD138-) from RA, but not in patients with PsA. CD27 upregulation and CD23 downregulation were observed in synovial B cells in both pathologies. Finally, a 4-fold increase in IFIT4 mRNA content was shown in B cells from SF in patients with RA. CONCLUSION: Synovial B cells from patients with RA and patients with PsA express different antigen-presenting cell phenotypes, suggesting that this cell type plays a dissimilar role in the pathogenesis of each disease.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".