Interleukin‐5 drives glycolysis and reactive oxygen species‐dependent citric acid cycling by eosinophils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Eosinophils have been long implicated in antiparasite immunity and allergic diseases and, more recently, in regulating adipose tissue homeostasis. The metabolic processes that govern eosinophils, particularly upon activation, are unknown. METHODS: Peripheral blood eosinophils were isolated for the analysis of metabolic processes using extracellular flux analysis and individual metabolites by stable isotope tracer analysis coupled to gas chromatography-mass spectrometry following treatment with IL-3, IL-5 or granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Eosinophil metabolism was elucidated using pharmacological inhibitors. RESULTS: Human eosinophils engage a largely glycolytic metabolism but also employ mitochondrial metabolism. Cytokine stimulation generates citric acid cycle (TCA) intermediates from both glucose and glutamine revealing this previously unknown role for mitochondria upon eosinophil activation. We further show that the metabolic programme driven by IL-5 is dependent on the STAT5/PI3K/Akt signalling axis and that nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase (NOX)-dependent ROS production might be a driver of mitochondrial metabolism upon eosinophil activation. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate for the first time that eosinophils are capable of metabolic plasticity, evidenced by increased glucose-derived lactate production upon ROS inhibition. Collectively, this study reveals a role for both glycolysis and mitochondrial metabolism in cytokine-stimulated eosinophils. Selective targeting of eosinophil metabolism may be of therapeutic benefit in eosinophil-mediated diseases and regulation of tissue homeostasis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".