Prevalence of a Novel Immunogenic Feline Erythrocyte Antigen (FEA 6) and Expression Patterns Between FEAs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background After the identification of five novel feline erythrocyte antigens (FEAs) and evidence establishing FEA 1's immunogenicity, attempts to sensitize a cat to FEA 4 unexpectedly resulted in the production of alloantibodies directed against an unknown antigen, named FEA 6. Objectives To estimate the prevalence of FEA 6 as a presumably new antigen, identify corresponding naturally occurring alloantibodies (NOAb), and investigate the associations between known FEAs. Animals Two hundread and seven cats. Methods Prospective blood typing for FEAs 1–6 was conducted in Type A cats (n = 193), followed by serial crossmatching in groups of 3–7 cats to detect NOAb and identify their target FEA. Agreement between FEA 6 blood typing and other FEAs was assessed. Associations between FEAs were evaluated to identify expression patterns. Results Among 193 Type A cats, 67% were FEA 6-positive. Agreement analyses were supportive of FEA 6 being distinct from FEAs 1–5. NOAb were detected in 11 cats (5.7%), none of which were anti-FEA 6. Only FEA 1-negative status was significantly associated with the presence of NOAb (OR = 6.6, 95% CI, 1.9–23.1; p < 0.001). Significant associations were observed between the expressions of FEAs 1 and 4 (χ2 = 25.7, p < 0.001), and FEAs 3 and 5 (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.001), respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Importance The immunogenicity and prevalence of the newly discovered FEA 6 raise concerns regarding its clinical relevance and role in posttransfusion sensitization. FEA 1/FEA 4 and FEA 3/FEA 5 pairs might belong to distinct antigenic systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".