MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4213276612 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab049.037

A38 EVALUATING GLYCOCAGED DEXAMETHASONE IN SHIP-DEFICIENT MICE

2022· article· en· W4213276612 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Luzentales-Simpson, Ho Kyung Jung, Susan C. Menzies, Wenqiang Ma, Carolyn Wang, Harry Brumer, Laura M. Sly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflammationDexamethasoneGastrointestinal tractEx vivoGut floraEndocrinologyImmune systemImmunologyBiologySystemic inflammationIn vivoInternal medicinePharmacologyChemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Corticosteroids systemically reduce immune system activity thereby limiting inflammation in the GI tract. Corticosteroid use is limited by deleterious systemic effects including immunosuppression and adverse effects on growth and development (Giles et al., 2018). The metabolism of dietary polysaccharides, such as plant cell wall xyloglucan, by gut symbionts has been demonstrated to be mediated by niche members of the human gut microbiota (Larsbrink et al., 2014). By caging corticosteroids like dexamethasone (DEX) with xyloglucans to be released by microbiota at the site of disease, there is potential to increase efficacy and limit adverse effects. Mice deficient in Src homology 2 domain-containing inositol polyphosphate 5’-phosphatase (SHIP-/-) develop spontaneous CD-like ileal inflammation (Ngoh et al., 2016). We have used SHIP-/- mice to compare the efficacy of DEX versus caged DEX to reduce intestinal inflammation. Aims Caged DEX will reduce CD-like ileal inflammation in SHIP-/- mice at a lower dose than uncaged DEX because it is released and acts at the site of inflammation. To assess this hypothesis we propose 3 aims: Measure decaging activity along the GI tract of SHIP-/- mice ex vivo Determine the minimum effective dose of DEX required to reduce ileal inflammation in SHIP-/- mice Determine if equimolar and lower concentrations of caged DEX can reduce ileal inflammation in SHIP-/- mice Methods Intestinal contents and feces were harvested from SHIP-/- mice. Decaging activity was measured ex vivo, using caged resorufin (a fluorescent reporter). SHIP-/- mice were orally gavaged with dexamethasone (or vehicle), or the molar equivalent of caged dexamethasone from 6–8 weeks of age. At 8 weeks of age, gross and histopathology were assessed and IL-1β concentrations were measured in full-thickness tissue homogenates. Results SHIP-/- mice demonstrated decaging activity in the cecal, colon, and fecal contents assayed. DEX treatment (3 or 1 mg/kg) of SHIP-/- mice eliminated CD-like gross pathology and histopathology, and reduced IL-1β concentrations in full-thickness ileal tissue homogenates from SHIP-/- mice compared to untreated or vehicle-treated mice. DEX did not have any harmful effects on the intestines of SHIP+/+ mice. 1 or 0.3 mg/kg molar equivalent of caged DEX (3-fold lower concentrations) eliminated CD-like gross pathology in SHIP-/- mice compared to treatment with vehicle control. Additionally, the mean IL-1β concentration in tissue homogenates of mice treated with the molar equivalent of 1 mg/kg caged DEX was reduced Conclusions SHIP-/- mice express decaging activity are effectively treated by DEX, and caged DEX shows similar efficacy at reducing SHIP-/- ileal pathology at lower concentrations than uncaged DEX. In future experiments, we will examine caged DEX at a lower concentration, and in 2nd mouse model of intestinal inflammation. Funding Agencies GlycoNet

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)0.000
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 score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicGastrointestinal motility and disorders→French-language works237,207→