Autoimmune response to COVID-19 characterised by eosinophilia, NETosis and EETosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A previously healthy man in his 50s was admitted with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. He was found to have persistent eosinophilia, with a peak level of 7.5×10 9 /L. He had received multiple courses of steroids, including dexamethasone and methylprednisolone, with no improvement. On day 47, hydrocortisone was initiated for the treatment of septic shock. This resulted in the normalisation of the eosinophil count, which correlated with radiographic and clinical improvement. The patient was transitioned off ECMO and eventually weaned off mechanical ventilation. Studies conducted using the patient’s serum identified circulating autoantibodies, which induced neutrophil extracellular traps (NETosis) and eosinophil extracellular traps (EETosis). A varying response of the eosinophils to different corticosteroids was observed in vivo that corresponded with the ex vivo experiments. This case highlights an unrecognised phenomenon of differential response to corticosteroids in severe COVID-19. Furthermore, this is the first reported case of EETosis in COVID-19.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".