Interplay of transcription factors in T-cell differentiation and function: the role of Runx
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past years, increasing numbers of distinct subsets have been discovered and identified for a T lymphocytes' entity. Differentiation and function of each T cell subset are controlled by a specific master transcription factor. Importantly, Runt-related transcription factors, particularly Runx1 and Runx3, interplay with these master regulators in various aspects of T cells' immunity. In this review article, we first explain roles of Th-Pok and Runx3 in differentiation of CD4 versus CD8 single positive cells, and later focus on cross-regulation of Th-Pok and Runx3 and their relationship with other factors such as TCR strength. Next, we provide evidences for the direct interplay of Runx1/3 with T-bet and GATA3 during Th1 versus Th2 commitment to activate or silence transcription of signature cytokine genes, IFNγ and IL4. Lastly, we explain feed-forward relationship between Runx1 and Foxp3 and discuss roles of Runx1 in regulatory T cells' suppressive activity. This review highlights an essential importance of Runx molecules in controlling various T cell subsets' differentiation and functions through molecular interplay with the master transcription factors in terms of protein-protein interaction as well as regulation of gene expression.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it