Proteinase‐activated receptor‐2 blockade inhibits changes seen in a chronic murine asthma model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Proteinase‐Activated Receptor‐2 (PAR2) is a G protein‐coupled receptor activated by serine proteinases. We have shown that PAR2 activation in the airways is involved in the development of allergic inflammation and airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) in acute murine models. We hypothesized that functional inhibition of PAR2 prevents allergic inflammation, AHR and airway remodeling in chronic allergic airway inflammation models. Material and Methods We developed and used a 12 week model of cockroach extract (CE)‐mediated AHR, airway inflammation and remodeling in BALB/c mice. Results Mice sensitized and challenged with CE for 12 weeks exhibit AHR, increased numbers of eosinophils in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and increased collagen content in the lung tissue compared to saline controls. Administration of an anti‐PAR2 antibody, SAM‐11, after the initial development of airway inflammation significantly inhibited all these parameters. Conclusions Our data demonstrate that PAR2 signaling plays a key role in CE‐induced AHR and airway inflammation/remodeling in long term models of allergic airway inflammation. Targeting PAR2 activation may be a successful therapeutic strategy for allergic asthma.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".