MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Participation of Inkt Cells in the Early and Late Components of Tc1‐Mediated DNFB Contact Sensitivity: Cooperative Role of γδ‐T Cells

2011· article· en· W1546239925 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Philip W. Askenase, Monika Majewska‐Szczepanik, Steven M. Kerfoot, Marian Szczepanik

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Immunology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPicryl chlorideCD1DEffectorCytotoxic T cellImmunologyChemistryReceptorCell biologyBiologyIn vitroT cellImmune systemT-cell receptorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior studies of classical 24 h responses in TNP-Cl (picryl chloride) allergic contact sensitivity (CS), showed mediation by Th1 cells in CBA mice, and established that 24 h elicitation of responses requires an early 2 h CS-initiating component dependent on iNKT cells, IL-4 and B-1 B cells. Here, we studied the other form of cytotoxic T cell (Tc1) CS in DNFB sensitized BALB/c mice and determined that similar CS-initiation also is required. We systematically tested each step of the initiation pathway in this model. Thus, DNFB Tc1 CS was significantly impaired in iNKT cell deficient CD1d(-/-) and Jα18(-/-) mice, IL4Rα(-/-) and STAT-6(-/-) mice, and also in pan B-cell deficient JH(-/-) mice. Further, the Tc1 DNFB CS-initiating component, like Th1 response to TNP-Cl, was elicited by only 1-day after immunization, due to B-1 cells. In summary, we show that CS-Initiation also is required in Tc1 CS. Further, we have newly determined regulatory support of both the early and late components of DNFB induced Tc1 CS by iNKT cells and γδ-T cells. In summary, both iNKT cells and assisting γδ-T cells are involved in initiating and effector phases of DNFB induced CS.

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)0.001
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 score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of ImmunologySame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207