The dose response of inhaled LPS challenge in healthy subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) inhalation causes neutrophilic airway inflammation. We used LPS produced to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards to characterise the dose response. A total of 15 healthy non-smoking subjects inhaled 5-, 15- and 50-µg LPS. Whole blood cell counts and serum C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured at baseline and up to 24 h post challenge. Sputum was induced at baseline and 6 h post challenge for cell counts and quantification of myeloperoxidase (MPO), interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8 and tumour necrosis factor α (TNF-α) in supernatants. LPS inhalation was well tolerated. Blood neutrophil counts increased at 6 h post LPS with all doses. Serum CRP significantly increased with 15- and 50-µg LPS. All LPS doses significantly increased sputum neutrophil percentage ( P < 0.001). IL-1β, IL-6 and TNF-α were significantly increased in sputum supernatant following challenge with 50-µg LPS, there was no change in MPO or IL-8. The 50-µg LPS was well tolerated and produced a robust inflammatory response. This study supports the use of 50-µg GMP-grade LPS as a suitable challenge agent in clinical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".