MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deficiency of prolactin-inducible protein leads to a lower Th1 immune response in vitro and in vivo (70.2)

2012· article· en· W1544524880 on OpenAlexaff
Jintao Li, Dong Liu, Anne Blanch, Ping Jia, Yvonne Myal, Jude E. Uzonna

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdrenal Hormones and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyImmune systemIn vivoImmunologyIn vitroT cellAntigenCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The prolactin-inducible protein (PIP) is a secretory protein strategically located at several ports of pathogen entry into the body and hence might play a role in the first line of immune defense against invading pathogens. To date, there are no studies that address the contributions of PIP against infection. Our previous studies show that PIP knockout (KO) mice had enlarged submandibular lymph nodes and thymic medulla. Here, we assessed the phenotype and responsiveness of immune cells from PIP KO mice to polyclonal T cell stimulators and model antigens in vitro and in vivo. We found that PIP KO mice have comparable numbers or frequency of immune cells, including T, B, natural killer and dendritic cells. In depth phenotypic analysis revealed that the PIP KO mice had slightly but significantly lower numbers of CD4+ T cells in their spleens and lymph nodes. Furthermore, CD4+ T cells from PIP KO mice showed significantly decreased proliferation, IL-2 production and impaired differentiation into Th1 subsets in vitro. The impaired in vitro Th1 response was confirmed in vivo where CD4+ T cells from OVA-immunized PIP KO mice showed significantly impaired proliferation and IFN-γ production following restimulation with OVA. Collectively, our findings implicate PIP as an important CD4+ modulatory protein that enhances Th1 cell response, and suggest that this protein might play critical roles in cell-mediated immunity and resistance to intracellular pathogens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicAdrenal Hormones and DisordersFrench-language works237,207