Cannabidiol Reduces Systemic Immune Activation in Experimental Acute Lung Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The underlying pathomechanism of acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the immune response to inflammation or infection within the pulmonary microcirculation. Systemic spread of pathogens, activated immune cells, and inflammatory mediators contributes significantly to mortality in patients with ARDS. Objective: The endogenous cannabinoid system is a major modulator of the immune response during inflammation and infection. Phytocannabinoids, such as cannabidiol (CBD), have shown promising anti-inflammatory effects in several pathologies. The overall objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of CBD on local and systemic inflammation in endotoxin-induced ALI in mice. Materials and Methods: ALI was induced by pulmonary endotoxin challenge. Four groups of male C57BL/6 mice were randomized in this study: control, ALI, ALI with CBD treatment, and control with CBD treatment. Analyses of local and systemic cytokine levels, lung histology, and leukocyte activation as visualized by intravital microscopy of the intestinal and pulmonary microcirculation were performed 6 h following intranasal endotoxin administration. Results: Pulmonary endotoxin challenge induced significant inflammation evidenced by local and systemic cytokine and chemokine release, lung histopathology, and leukocyte adhesion. Intraperitoneal CBD treatment resulted in a significant decrease in systemic inflammation as shown by reduced leukocyte adhesion in the intestinal microcirculation and reduced plasma cytokine and chemokine levels. Pulmonary chemokine levels were decreased, while pulmonary cytokine levels were unchanged. Surprisingly, the ALI score was slightly increased by CBD treatment in a manner driven by enhanced neutrophil infiltration of the alveoli. Conclusion: In this model of experimental ALI, CBD administration was associated with reduced systemic inflammation and heterogeneous effects on pulmonary inflammation. Future studies should explore the mechanisms involved as they relate to neutrophil infiltration and proinflammatory mediator production within the lungs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".