In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

[EX Q]: Context: We have previously shown that phospholipid oxidation products of 1-palmitoyl-2-arachidonoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphorylcholine (ox-PAPC) inhibit lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced E-selectin expression and neutrophil binding in human aortic endothelial cells (HAECs). The current studies identify specific phospholipids that inhibit chemokine induction by Toll-like receptor-4 (TLR4) and -2 (TLR2) ligands inECs and macrophages.', 'Measurements of interleukin (IL)-8 and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 levels secreted from ox-PAPC- and LPS-cotreated ECs indicate that ox-PAPC inhibits activation of TLR4 by LPS. The effects of IL-1beta and tumor necrosis factor-alpha, which utilize the same intracellular signaling molecules, were not inhibited. Cell fractionation and immunofluorescence analyses demonstrate that LPS induces membrane translocation of the LPS receptor complex to a lipid raft/caveolar fraction in ECs. Ox-PAPC inhibits this translocation and alters caveolin-1 distribution. Supporting an important role for caveolae in LPS action, overexpression of caveolin-1 enhanced LPS-induced IL-8 synthesis. Ox-PAPC also inhibits the effect of TLR2 and TLR4 ligands in human macrophages.\Question: Do specific phospholipid oxidation products inhibit ligand activation of toll-like receptors 4 and 2?
[EX A]: These studies report a novel mechanism that involves alterations to lipid raft/caveolar processing, by which specific phospholipid oxidation products inhibit activation by TLR4 and TLR2 ligands. These studies have broader implications for the role of ox-PAPC as a regulator of specific lipid raft/caveolar function.

[EX Q]: Context: Mechanical support leads to an increased risk of both bleeding and thrombotic events, but little is known about the risk of device support in patients with a baseline predisposition to these events. The aim of this study was to examine outcomes among patients with baseline hematologic conditions who underwent continuous-flow LVAD implantation (CF-LVAD).', 'We retrospectively reviewed records of 286 patients who underwent CF-LVAD implantation at the Columbia University Medical Center between April 2008 and December 2013. Patients diagnosed with the following hematologic conditions were enrolled: idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP); Factor V Leiden; elevated Factor VIII; heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT); or undefined hypercoagulable state.', 'Of the 286 CF-LVAD patients implanted during the study period, 12 were considered to have a significant hematologic condition predisposing them to either bleeding or thrombotic events. The study included 5 patients with ITP, 1 with Factor V Leiden, 1 with elevated Factor VIII, 2 with HIT and 3 patients with undefined hypercoagulable state. Patients were supported for a total of 168.46 months, with a median of 10.76 months (IQR 4.78 to 21.36 months). There was a high frequency of thrombotic (0.57 event per patient-year), neurologic (0.36 event per patient-year) and bleeding (0.64 event per patient-year). Actuarial survival rates at 6 and 12 months were 81.8%, but fell to 49% at 2 years.\Question: Do prior hematologic conditions carry a high morbidity and mortality in patients supported with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices?
[EX A]: Patients with a history of prior hematologic conditions are at high risk for bleeding, thrombotic and neurologic events during device support, leading to early mortality. This case series questions the benefit of CF-LVAD in these patients and the appropriate management with regard to anti-coagulation. Further studies on the outcomes of these patients are warranted.

[EX Q]: Context: Atopic dermatitis (AD) often develops in infancy as the first manifestation of the atopic phenotype. Wheezing is also common in infancy, but it is less clear whether infant wheezing should be considered as an atopic phenotype. If infant wheeze and AD share a common aetiology, this would indicate that infant wheezing is an atopic phenotype.', 'To investigate whether potential risk factors for infant wheeze and AD have similar effects on these 2 phenotypes, indicating a common etiology.', 'A total of 34.793 mother-child pairs enrolled in the Danish National Birth Cohort were followed prospectively. Information on wheezing episodes, AD, and prenatal, perinatal, and postnatal risk factors was collected by interview at 12 and 30 weeks of gestation, at 6 and 18 months of age, and by linkage to the Danish Medical Birth Register. Data were analyzed by binary and polytomous logistic regression models.', 'The following variables had significantly differential effects on infant wheezing and AD: parental hay fever, parental asthma, parental AD, sex, maternal age, maternal occupation, smoking during pregnancy, season of birth, birth weight, gestational age, head circumference, breast-feeding, number of older siblings, day care attendance, and pets in the home.\Question: Do differential effects of risk factors on infant wheeze and atopic dermatitis emphasize a different etiology?
[EX A]:
The majority of risk factors had differential effects on infant wheeze and AD indicative of a different etiology. Infant wheezing does not seem to be etiologically linked to the epidemic of atopic disease, and infant wheezing should not be used as an indicator of the atopic phenotype.