MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400693263 · doi:10.1152/ajplung.00121.2024

T cell and airway smooth muscle interaction: a key driver of asthmatic airway inflammation and remodeling

2024· review· en· W4400693263 on OpenAlexafffund
Mu‐Yang Zhou, Rui Sun, Joyce H. Jang, James G. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsAirwayInflammationKey (lock)MedicineImmunologyBiologyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross talk between T cells and airway smooth muscle (ASM) may play a role in modulating asthmatic airway inflammation and remodeling. Infiltrating T cells have been observed within the ASM bundles of asthmatics, and a wide range of direct and indirect interactions between T cells and ASM has been demonstrated using various in vitro and in vivo model systems. Contact-dependent mechanisms such as ligation and activation of cellular adhesion and costimulatory molecules, as well as the formation of lymphocyte-derived membrane conduits, facilitate the adhesion, bidirectional communication, and transfer of materials between T and ASM cells. T cell-derived cytokines, particularly of the Th1, Th2, and Th17 subsets, modulate the secretome, proliferation, and contractility of ASM cells. This review summarizes the mechanisms governing T cell-ASM cross talk in the context of asthma. Understanding the underlying mechanistic basis is important for directing future research and developing therapeutic interventions targeted toward this complex interaction.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and Molecular PhysiologySame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207