MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2389300551

Culture Time Influences SLE Serum Inducing MDDC

2004· article· en· W2389300551 on OpenAlexaff
Zhang Jiang-quan

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Academiae Medicinae Nanjing · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCD80ImmunologyMonocyteFlow cytometryMedicineBiologyCD40In vitroCytotoxic T cellBiochemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To study the time correlation in inducing the monocyte-derived-dendritic cells (MDDC) by the serum of sys- temic lupus erythematosus (SLE) . Methods: The purified normal monocytes, cultured in GM-CSF/IL-4 and Normal serum and SLE serum, were collected on the third, fifth and seventh day. Flow cytometric was used to identify the surface markers, and mixed leukocyte reaction to assess the function. Results: On day 3, monocytes were clustered and differentiated into dendritic cells (DCs) identified by scan electronic microscopy in SLE Serum, as the GM-CSF/IL-4 system, while Normal serum lacked the effects mentioned above. Phe-notypical evaluation revealed that HLA-DR expression in GM-CSF/IL-4 system always ranked top, while CD80 projected with the addition of LPS. Normal serum could not boost HLA-DR and CD80, yet, in SLE serum system, monocyte did differentiate into DCs that express higher HLA-DR and CD80. The stimulation index (SI) of mixed leukocyte reaction (MLR) of MDDC induced by the SLE serum peaked at the fifth day and slipped at day 7. Conclusion: SLE serum could induce normal monocytes into DCs that is highly correlated with the culture time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Academiae Medicinae Nanjing→Same topicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses→French-language works237,207→