Effect of storage period of red blood cell suspensions on helper T-cell subpopulations.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the immunological alterations that occur during the storage of erythrocyte suspensions which may lead to transfusion-related immunomodulation following allogeneic blood transfusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One part of the erythrocyte suspensions obtained from donors was leucoreduced while the other part was not. The leucoreduced (LR) and non-leucoreduced (NL) erythrocyte suspensions were then further divided into three equal amounts which were stored for 0, 21 or 42 days prior to measurements, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, of cytokine levels in their supernatants. T-helper (Th) lymphocyte subgroups and gene expression were analysed in the NL erythrocyte suspensions by flow cytometry and real-time polymerase chain reaction, respectively. Results were compared to those of storage day 0. RESULTS: By day 21, the number of Th2 cells had increased significantly and the numbers of Th1, Th22 and Treg cells had decreased significantly in the NL erythrocyte suspensions. On day 42 the numbers of Th2 and Treg cells in the NL suspensions were significantly increased while the number of Th1 cells was significantly decreased. The levels of transcription factors (TBX21, GATA3, and SPI.1) were significantly decreased on days 21 and 42, and AHR, FOXP3 and RORC2 levels were significantly increased on day 42 in NL erythrocyte suspensions. The decrease in interleukin-22 and increase in transforming growth factor-β levels found in NL erythrocyte suspensions on day 21 were statistically significant. Elevated levels of interleukin-17A were found in both LR and NL erythrocyte suspensions on day 42. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that allogeneic leucocytes and cytokines may play significant roles in the development of transfusion-related immunomodulation.
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) | 0.002 | 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".