MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913301244 · doi:10.1080/21505594.2019.1568174

Galactosaminogalactan (GAG) and its multiple roles in <i>Aspergillus</i> pathogenesis

2019· review· en· W2913301244 on OpenAlexafffund
Cornelia Speth, Günter Rambach, Cornelia Lass‐Flörl, P. Lynne Howell, Donald C. Sheppard

Bibliographic record

VenueVirulence · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAustrian Science FundCanada Research ChairsCS Fund
KeywordsAspergillosisPathogenesisAspergillus fumigatusBiologyAspergillusVirulenceDiseaseMicrobiologyImmunologyPneumoniaMedicinePathologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aspergillus spp and particularly the species Aspergillus fumigatus are the causative agents of invasive aspergillosis, a progressive necrotizing pneumonia that occurs in immunocompromised patients. The limited efficacy of currently available antifungals has led to interest in a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of invasive aspergillosis in order to identify new therapeutic targets for this devastating disease. The Aspergillus exopolysaccharide galactosaminogalactan (GAG) plays an important role in the pathogenesis of experimental invasive aspergillosis. The present review article summarizes our current understanding of GAG composition and synthesis and the molecular mechanisms whereby GAG promotes virulence. Promising directions for future research and the prospect of GAG as both a therapy and therapeutic target are reviewed.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations84
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirulenceSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207