MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W33818359 · doi:10.2310/6620.2008.00005c

A Light Emitting Mouse to Image Skin Inflammation

2008· article· en· W33818359 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jason Bentow, Rattapon Thuangtong, Julie Iwasaki, Samuel W. French, Michael S. Kolodney

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfiltration (HVAC)LuciferaseInflammationCre recombinaseDermisPathologyMedicineEdemaMolecular biologyTransgeneGenetically modified mouseImmunologyGeneTransfectionBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The mouse ear swelling test is a well-accepted method for quantitating the inflammatory response to contact irritants and sensitizing agents. However, this assay measures edema rather than the cellular component of skin inflammation. OBJECTIVE: To develop a quantitative and noninvasive assay of inflammatory cell infiltration in contact dermatitis. METHODS: We bred a transgenic bioluminescent mouse that emits light proportional to cutaneous infiltration of inflammatory cells. We characterized this model by correlating luminescence with edema and histologic analysis of affected skin. A mouse strain expressing cyclization recombinase enzyme (cre) recombinase exclusively in myeloid cells was crossed with a reporter strain containing an inactivated form of the luciferase gene. In progeny mice, cre-mediated recombination repaired the luciferase gene, causing light emission from myeloid cells. Light emission and swelling from the inflamed ear was quantitated and compared to the contralateral ear. RESULTS: Light intensity correlated with the inflammatory cell infiltration in the dermis. In sensitized mice challenged with squaric acid, luminescence increased about 2.2-fold while swelling increased about 1.5-fold. CONCLUSION: Our model may serve as a useful screening assay for topical antiinflammatory molecules. Moreover, this approach allows real-time imaging of skin infiltration by specific inflammatory cell lineages in living animals.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitis→Same topicDermatology and Skin Diseases→French-language works237,207→