Local complement synthesis—A process with near and far consequences for ischemia reperfusion injury and transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The model of the solid organ as a target for circulating complement deposited at the site of injury, for many years concealed the broader influence of complement in organ transplantation. The study of locally synthesized complement especially in transplantation cast new light on complement's wider participation in ischaemia-reperfusion injury, the presentation of donor antigen and finally rejection. The lack of clarity, however, has persisted as to which complement activation pathways are involved and how they are triggered, and above all whether the distinction is relevant. In transplantation, the need for clarity is heightened by the quest for precision therapies in patients who are already receiving potent immunosuppressives, and because of the opportunity for well-timed intervention. This review will present new evidence for the emerging role of the lectin pathway, weighed alongside the longer established role of the alternative pathway as an amplifier of the complement system, and against contributions from the classical pathway. It is hoped this understanding will contribute to the debate on precisely targeted versus broadly acting therapeutic innovation within the aim to achieve safe long term graft acceptance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".