MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132927401

Human neutrophil peptides induce endothelial-monocyte interactions and accelerate foam cell formation

2008· dissertation· W7132927401 on OpenAlexafffund
Kieran L. Quinn

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2008
Typedissertation
Language
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsCanadian Chiropractic AssociationUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsFoam cellInflammationIntracellularCell adhesionCell adhesion moleculeEndothelial stem cellCellAdhesionIntercellular Adhesion Molecule-1Immune system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. Atherosclerosis involves the coupling of inflammatory responses and dyslipidemia, but the underlying mechanisms by which inflammation contributes to atherosclerosis remains unclear. Human neutrophil peptides (HNP) released from activated neutrophils have demonstrated immune modulating effects. Hypothesis. HNP induce endothelial-monocyte interactions and accelerate foam cell formation. Methods. Human pulmonary artery endothelial cells were stimulated with HNP to assess adhesion and migration of monocytes in co-culture. THP-1 derived macrophages were stained for intracellular lipids after exposure to HNP and native low density lipoprotein. Results. HNP increased expression of inflammatory cytokines and adhesion molecules in all cell types studied. These were associated with an increase in adhesion, migration, and foam cell formation, which was abrogated using the reactive oxygen species scavenger super oxide dismutase. Conclusions. HNP can activate endothelial cells that leads to endothelial-monocyte interactions, and HNP induce foam cell formation through oxidative stress.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207