The Immunostimulatory Capacity of Nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae Lipooligosaccharide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We have recently found that lipooligosaccharide (LOS) isolated from encapsulated strains of Haemophilus influenzae (H. influenzae) has strong adjuvant, but diminished pro-inflammatory ability as compared to Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS). In this study, we aimed to determine the immunostimulatory capacity of nontypeable/ non-encapsulated H. influenzae (NTHi) LOS by comparing the effect of killed bacteria with LOS isolated from the same strain.Methods: Following stimulation of human monocytic THP-1 cells with killed NTHi strain 375, or with the corresponding amount of LOS, we studied the protein and gene expression of immunostimulatory and antigen-presenting molecules, cytokines, and innate immune receptors.Results: Stimulation with LOS resulted in lower expression of adhesion (CD54, CD58) as well as costimulatory molecules (CD40, CD86), but in higher expression of antigen-presenting molecules (HLA-DR and HLA-ABC) compared to killed NTHi, whereas killed bacteria induced higher release of both TNF-α and IL-10. The results indicate that while LOS of NTHi has decreased capacity to induce pro-inflammatory responses compared to E. coli LPS or killed NTHi, this LOS has the potential to facilitate antigen presentation.Conclusions: Considering the important role of NTHi as a respiratory pathogen, and its currently increasing significance in the etiology of invasive infections, LOS deserves further attention as a vaccine antigen, which also has potent adjuvant properties.Keywords: Nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae, Lipooligosaccharide, THP-1 cells, innate immune responses
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".