MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1777882158 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.180.12.7958

IL-6, in Synergy with IL-7 or IL-15, Stimulates TCR-Independent Proliferation and Functional Differentiation of CD8+ T Lymphocytes

2008· article· en· W1777882158 on OpenAlexafffund
Julien Gagnon, Sheela Ramanathan, Chantal LeBlanc, Alexandre Cloutier, Patrick P. McDonald, Subburaj Ilangumaran

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsT-cell receptorCell biologyCD8Interleukin 15Cytotoxic T cellBiologyCytokineT cellImmunologyInterleukinImmune systemIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent reports have shown that IL-21, in synergy with IL-15, stimulates proliferation of CD8(+) T lymphocytes in the absence of signaling via the TCR. In this study, we show that IL-6, which induces phosphorylation of STAT3 similarly to IL-21, also can stimulate proliferation of CD8(+) T cells in synergy with IL-7 or IL-15. IL-6 displays a stronger synergy with IL-7 than with IL-15 to stimulate naive CD8(+) T cells. Concomitant stimulation by IL-6 or IL-21 augments phosphorylation and DNA-binding activity of STAT5 induced by IL-7 or IL-15. Like IL-21, IL-6 reduces the TCR signaling threshold required to stimulate CD8(+) T cells. Prior culture of P14 TCR transgenic CD8 T cells with IL-6 or IL-21 in the presence of IL-7 or IL-15 augments their proliferation and cytolytic activity upon subsequent stimulation by Ag. Furthermore, cytokine stimulation induces quantitatively and qualitatively distinct phenotypic changes on CD8(+) T cells compared with those induced by TCR signaling. We propose that the ability of IL-6 to induce TCR-independent activation of CD8(+) T cells in synergy with IL-7 or IL-15 may play an important role in the transition from innate to adaptive immunity.

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)0.000
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 score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations100
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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