MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of the Complement System and Human Complement 1 Inhibitor (C1-INH) in a Pig Lung Transplant Survival Model.

2014· article· en· W2773599510 on OpenAlexaffabout
İlker İskender, V. Linacre, Tiago Machuca, Shaun Pacheco, Shuai Xu, R. Zamel, Daisuke Nakajima, Zhiyu Guan, Marcelo Cypel, Shaf Keshavjee, M. Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplement systemMedicineLung transplantationLungTransplantationThrombusLectin pathwayXenotransplantationSalinePharmacologyImmunologyAlternative complement pathwayInternal medicineAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Primary graft dysfunction is the leading cause of early morbidity and mortality following lung transplantation. Inhibition of complement has been shown to be beneficial in human and animal studies related to lung transplantation. Our objective was to test the safety and efficacy of human complement 1 inhibitor (C1-INH) in a pre-clinical large animal lung transplant survival model. Methods: Yorkshire male pigs (25-35 kg) were used. Donor lungs were harvested and preserved for 24h at 4°C followed by left single lung transplantation. Animals in the control arm (n=5) received saline, and in the treatment arm (n=4) received 200 IU/kg of C1-INH one hour before reperfusion. Animals were kept alive for 3 days. Systemic blood samples were taken before thoracotomy and at 1, 6, 24, 48, and 72h after reperfusion. The complement system was evaluated with hemolytic assays and an ELISA-based functional assay. Results: All animals in the control arm survived to sacrifice on postoperative day 3. Two out of 4 animals in the treatment arm, however, developed graft failure and the experiments were terminated within the first postoperative day. Autopsy showed major right pulmonary artery thrombus in one and bronchial casts in the both failed animals. Human C1-INH dose-dependently blocked pig classical and lectin complement activation in vitro. However, the complement system, as determined by CH50 and C3H50 activity, was not significantly activated. Moreover, there was more complement activation in the sera of treated animals, especially for the lectin pathway. Pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-6 level was significantly higher in the treatment arm as well. Conclusions: In contrast to data from clinical and experimental lung transplantation, complement activation does not seem to be a major mechanism of ischemia-reperfusion related lung injury in this pig model. Administration of human C1-INH caused systemic and local side effects on pigs underwent lung transplantation after prolonged cold ischemia. For large animal pre-clinical trials, models with significant complement activation would be preferred for evaluation of the potential efficacy and safety oh human C1-INH in lung transplant setting. This project was partially supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research and CSL Behring.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207