The Importance of Neutrophils in Osteoarthritis: Current Concepts and Therapeutic Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common degenerative joint disease that causes chronic pain and disability. Different innate immune components, including macrophages, T cells, and neutrophils, participate in OA pathophysiology. Neutrophils are the most abundant circulating leukocytes with multiple specialized functions contributing to innate and adaptive immune functions. Although neutrophils produce proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines, reactive oxygen species (ROS), matrix-degrading enzymes, and neutrophil extracellular traps (NET) that promote joint degradation as the first recruit cells in an inflamed joint, these cells also play an important role in joint repair by regulating the immune response, releasing anti-inflammatory factors, and activating certain protective genes. In this review, various aspects of neutrophil biology, their role in inflammation and its association with OA, and possible therapeutic approaches to target neutrophils for the treatment of OA are described. Since neutrophils play a complex role in the pathophysiology of osteoarthritis, contributing to joint degradation as well as joint repair, targeting these cells is likely to pave the way for a potential therapeutic approach for the management of OA. Future studies are needed to investigate the use of targeted therapies to modulate neutrophil function and identify their subpopulations that are associated with osteoarthritis progression or response to treatment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".