Invasive and Non-invasive Clinical Haemophilus influenzae Type A Isolates Activate Differentiated HL-60 Cells In Vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: type a (Hia) relies on immune mechanisms such as complement-mediated opsonophagocytosis by neutrophils in coordination with opsonization by anti-capsular antibodies. This study evaluated if Hia could activate the immune response through neutrophils and if these responses differed between encapsulated versus unencapsulated or invasive versus non-invasive strains. Methods: infection model to measure Hia's susceptibility to killing and dHL-60 surface molecule expression, respectively. The impact of strain-specific features on the immune response was investigated using clinical isolates of a dominant North American sequence type (ST)-23, including Hia 11-139 (encapsulated, invasive), 14-61 (encapsulated, non-invasive), 13-0074 (unencapsulated, invasive), as well as a representative ST-4 isolate (Hia 13-240, encapsulated, invasive), and a nontypeable strain (NTHi 375, unencapsulated, non-invasive). Results: Unencapsulated and non-invasive Hi strains were more susceptible to killing by the innate immune response while the ST-23 invasive strain, Hia 11-139 required serum antibodies for destruction. Flow cytometry analysis showed increased expression of co-stimulatory molecule ICAM-1 and Fc receptors (CD89, CD64) but decreased expression of the Fc receptor CD16, revealing potential mechanisms of neutrophil-mediated defense against Hia that extend to both non-invasive and invasive strains. Conclusions: Hia clinical isolates with diverse pathogenicity illustrated contrasting susceptibility to killing by immune mechanisms while maintaining the same capacity to activate neutrophil-like cells, further underscoring the need for additional studies on Hia's pathogenesis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".