MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175576388 · doi:10.1016/j.bcp.2021.114667

Interplay between LPA2 and LPA3 in LPA-mediated phosphatidylserine cell surface exposure and extracellular vesicles release by erythrocytes

2021· article· en· W3175576388 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephan Hasse, Anne‐Claire Duchez, Paul R. Fortin, Éric Boilard, Sylvain Bourgoin

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Pharmacology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPhagocytosis and Immune Regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhosphatidylserineExtracellularChemistryVesicleExtracellular vesiclesCell biologyBiophysicsBiologyBiochemistryMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence is growing for the role of red blood cells (RBCs) in vascular homeostasis, including thrombogenic events and inflammation. Lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) is known to induce phosphatidylserine (PS) exposure and the release of RBC Extracellular Vesicles (REVs). Using high sensitivity flow cytometry, we examined the effects and the mechanisms by which the LPA species commonly found in human plasma could activate RBCs. We report that LPA 16:0, 18:0 and 18:1, but not LPA 20:4, induced PS exposure and the release of small PS− and large PS+ REVs through LPA3 receptor signalling in RBCs. The release of large PS+ REVs required higher concentrations of LPA. RBCs were not activated by LPA 20:4. Interestingly, blockade of LPA2 enhanced LPA-mediated PS− REV release in RBCs. Furthermore, LPA receptor agonists and antagonists highlighted that LPA 20:4 inhibited LPA3-dependent PS exposure and, through the LPA2 receptor, inhibited PS− REV production. Activation of RBCs with LPA 18:1 in normal plasma stimulated the release of PS− and PS+ REVs. REVs released in response to LPA were similar to those found in the plasma of systemic lupus erythematosus patients. Our results suggest that LPA species exhibit different biological activities in RBCs through targeting LPA2 and/or LPA3 receptors.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical PharmacologySame topicPhagocytosis and Immune RegulationFrench-language works237,207