MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788022358 · doi:10.22203/ecm.v035a02

TiO2 nanoparticles can selectively bind CXCL8 impacting on neutrophil chemotaxis

2018· article· en· W2788022358 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna Batt, Mike Milward, Iain Chapple, Melissa M. Grant, Scott J. Roberts, Owen Addison

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Cells and Materials · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Nanomaterials in Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsInterleukin 8ChemotaxisChemokineChemistryTitaniumInflammationBiophysicsMaterials scienceImmunologyReceptorMedicineBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The interaction between TiO 2 nanoparticles (NPs) and inflammatory cytokines, including CXCL8, a clinically relevant pro-inflammatory chemokine, was investigated. TiO 2 is present in tissues adjacent to failing implanted Ti (titanium) devices. TiO 2 NPs were shown to bind to CXCL8 in vitro, causing perturbation of quantification of CXCL8 by ELISA, in both simple and complex protein panels, in a dose-dependent manner. Binding between TiO 2 NPs and CXCL8 was demonstrated by protein gel electrophoresis. TiO 2 NPs were also shown to inactivate the chemoattractant property of CXCL8 in a dose-dependent manner, suggesting that the binding between TiO 2 NPs and CXCL8 is likely to be clinically relevant. The results of this study disputed the applicability of detection of CXCL8 by ELISA in systems where TiO 2 NPs were present. Clinically, the disruption of neutrophil chemotaxis due to CXCL8 binding to TiO 2 NPs might result in a hampered inflammatory response.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Cells and MaterialsSame topicAdvanced Nanomaterials in CatalysisFrench-language works237,207