MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407268733 · doi:10.3791/67877

Prediction of Red Blood Cell Antibody Significance Using the Monocyte-Macrophage Assay

2025· article· en· W4407268733 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay K. Hillis, Selena Cen, Clemence Salou, Yeniley Ruiz Noa, Donald R. Branch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythrocyte Function and Pathophysiology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood ServicesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhagocytosisMonocyteAntibodyMacrophageOpsoninPeripheral blood mononuclear cellBiologyInnate immune systemImmune systemImmunologyMononuclear phagocyte systemMolecular biologyIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Derived from monocytes in the bone marrow, macrophages are large, innate immune cells that play a major role in clearing dead cells, debris, tumor cells, and foreign pathogens. The phagocytic capacity of monocytes versus macrophages is a concept that is not well understood. Here, we aim to examine a difference in the phagocytosis of monocytes versus macrophages, specifically M1/M2 macrophages, against various opsonized red cells using a modified and updated version of the established monocyte monolayer assay (MMA). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated from donor buffy coats. Using purified monocytes, inflammatory M1 and anti-inflammatory M2 macrophages were produced by in vitro culture and polarization. M1/M2 cells were harvested and used in an MMA-like assay, which we refer to as the M-MA, to decipher clinically significant phagocytosis of various red cell antibodies. A phagocytic index (PI) > 5 was deemed clinically significant phagocytosis with the use of monocytes. A phagocytic index (PI) > 12 was deemed clinically significant phagocytosis with the use of M1/M2 macrophages. M2 macrophages demonstrate an increased ability to phagocytose opsonized RBCs compared to monocytes and M1s. The same weak antibody (anti-S) yields significant phagocytosis with only M2 macrophages (PI=43) but not M1s (PI=2) or monocytes (PI=0), and this was demonstrated repeatedly using various antibodies. The use of M2 macrophages instead of monocytes may allow for more accurate results as these cells are more phagocytic, offering further clinical relevance to the assay. Further studies with different antibodies to red blood cells, including validation of the monocyte-macrophage assay (M-MA) with antibodies having known clinical significance, may show the M-MA more useful to help predict clinically significant red cell alloantibodies and transfusion reactions. This method will advance the field of transfusion medicine and immunology.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicErythrocyte Function and PathophysiologyFrench-language works237,207