Leishmania Viannia guyanensis, LRV1 virus and extracellular vesicles: a dangerous trio influencing the faith of immune response during muco-cutaneous leishmaniasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parasites of Leishmania genus have developed various strategies to overcome host immune response favoring its infection and development toward leishmaniasis. With an array of virulence factors, those parasites modify host macrophage signaling and functions. Depending of the species involved, visceral or cutaneous leishmaniasis will develop. Several years ago, Leishmania Viannia guyanensis that is naturally infected with the endosymbiotic virus Leishmania RNA Virus 1 was found to cause a particularly aggressive form of South-American mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. This virus, when co-transmitted with the parasite was shown to strongly modulate RNA sensors and NLRP3 inflammasome network that could explain in part the exacerbated skin pathology caused by this particular parasite. In this review, we will be discussing how this endosymbiotic virus-infected Leishmania in conjunction with Leishmania exosomes partner together to manipulate host immune response in their favor.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".