MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sarcolemmal Complement Membrane Attack Complex Deposits During Acute Rejection of Myofibers in Nonhuman Primates

2018· article· en· W2883243696 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel Skuk, Jacques P. Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation Research
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplement membrane attack complexHistologyTacrolimusTransplantationMyocyteContext (archaeology)H&E stainAntibodyCD8PathologyBiologyImmunohistochemistryImmunologyMedicineComplement systemInternal medicineImmune systemEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Transplantation (Tx) of myogenic cells has potential applications in the treatment of muscle disorders. Excluding purely autologous Tx, the survival of myofibers formed by cell Tx depends on control of acute rejection (AR). Since there were no criteria for diagnosing AR of myofibers in the clinic, we conducted studies in nonhuman primates to fill this void. We already determined the histology of AR in this context. Since preliminary observations showed the presence of complement membrane attack complex (MAC) in the periphery of myofibers during AR, we analyzed whether MAC deposits occurred before, during and after AR of myofibers. Methods We allotransplanted muscle precursor cells (MPCs) in macaques immunosuppressed with tacrolimus. To induce AR of allogeneic myofibers produced by the cell Tx, tacrolimus was given for one month (to allow complete myofiber regeneration by the grafted MPCs) and then withdrawn (week 0). MPC-grafted sites were biopsied at tacrolimus withdrawal and then every 2 weeks, being analyzed by histology (hematoxylin & eosin, immunodetection of CD8 and CD4) until the rejection resolution (week 12-16). MAC was revealed by immunodetection of C5b-9. Blood was sampled before Tx, at week 0 and then at every 2 weeks to detect antibodies against donor’s MPCs by flow cytometry. Results As described yet, the histological mark of AR is the presence of dense focal accumulations of CD8+ / CD4+ lymphocytes around myofibers. These lymphocyte accumulations appeared in week 4-8, peaked in week 6-14, and then declined to disappear in 4 weeks or more. Circulating antibodies against donor’s MPCs appeared in week 6-10, reached a maximum 2 weeks later, and were elevated for the rest of the follow-up. No MAC was detected in biopsies that preceded the onset of lymphocyte accumulations. At the peak of lymphocyte infiltration, several myofibers exhibited sarcolemmal MAC partially or completely covering the myofiber contour, generally close to lymphocyte accumulations (Figure). Some of these myofibers also had sarcoplasmic MAC labeling (Figure, arrow) indicating membrane damage and necrosis, but the majority had no pathological alterations (Figure, asteriks). Several myofibers with sarcolemmal MAC and no pathological alterations were observed in the biopsies of the following periods until the end of the follow-up, independently of the scarcity or absence of lymphocyte accumulations.Conclusions Sarcolemmal MAC deposits appeared concurrently with myofiber AR. Since the vast majority of myofibers with sarcolemmal MAC were histologically normal, we can deduce that MAC is not harmful to myofibers. The persistence of sarcolemmal MAC after the peak of AR is intriguing. From the point of view of biopsy analysis, we suggest that sarcolemmal MAC could be an indicator of present or previous AR. It would be interesting to analyze how long sarcolemmal MAC remains after AR. Supported by grants of the Jesse’s Journey Foundation for Gene and Cell Therapy of Canada and the Canadian Institute of Health.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation ResearchFrench-language works237,207