MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574668619 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.1.222

Superantigen Stimulation Reveals the Contribution of Lck to Negative Regulation of T Cell Activation

2004· article· en· W1574668619 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabriel Criado, Joaquı́n Madrenas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthKidney Foundation of Canada
KeywordsSuperantigenT-cell receptorT cellCell biologyImmunological synapseInternalizationSignal transductionCD28Jurkat cellsStimulationBiologyCellImmunologyImmune systemNeuroscienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conventional paradigm of T cell activation through the TCR states that Lck plays a critical activating role in this signaling process. However, the T cell response to bacterial superantigens does not require Lck. In this study we report that not only is Lck dispensable for T cell activation by superantigens, but it actively inhibits this signaling pathway. Disruption of Lck function, either by repression of Lck gene expression or by selective pharmacologic inhibitors of Lck, led to increased IL-2 production in response to superantigen stimulation. This negative regulatory effect of Lck on superantigen-induced T cell responses required the kinase activity of Lck and correlated with early TCR signaling, but was independent of immunological synapse formation and TCR internalization. Our data demonstrate that the multistage role of Lck in T cell signaling includes the activation of a negative regulatory pathway of T cell activation.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207