MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607337998 · doi:10.1186/s13223-017-0195-8

Preconception allergen sensitization can induce B10 cells in offspring: a potential main role for maternal IgG

2017· article· en· W2607337998 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marília Garcia de Oliveira, Luana de Mendonça Oliveira, Aline Lira, Fábio da Ressureição Sgnotto, Alberto José da Silva Duarte, Maria Notomi Sato, Jefferson Russo Victor

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and Medication Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São PauloUniversidade de São PauloFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsSensitizationOffspringAllergenImmunologyMedicineAllergyBiologyPregnancyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms through which allergies can be inhibited after preconception immunization with allergens are not fully understood. We aimed to evaluate whether maternal immunization can induce a regulatory B (B10) cell population in offspring in concert with allergy inhibition. METHODS: C57BL/6 females were or were not immunized with OVA and were mated with normal WT males. Their offspring were evaluated at 3 days of age or 20 days after neonatal immunization. Human peripheral B cells from atopic and non-atopic individuals were also evaluated. RESULTS: Preconception OVA immunization induced B10 cells in offspring, and IL-10 production appeared to be critical for FcγRIIB upregulation in offspring B cells. Murine and human IL-10-producing B cells responded in vitro to IgG according to the atopic repertoire of the cells. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal that maternal immunization induces allergen-specific B10 cells in offspring and a pivotal role for the IgG repertoire in IL-10 production by murine and human B cells.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical ImmunologySame topicPregnancy and Medication ImpactFrench-language works237,207