MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1856321184 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0802442

The Immunostimulatory Activity of Unmethylated and Methylated CpG Oligodeoxynucleotide Is Dependent on Their Ability To Colocalize with TLR9 in Late Endosomes

2010· article· en· W1856321184 on OpenAlexafffund
Susan de Jong, Genc Basha, Kaley D. Wilson, Mikameh Kazem, Pieter R. Cullis, Wilf Jefferies, Ying K. Tam

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsArbutus Biopharma (Canada)Arthritis Research Centre of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTLR9ColocalizationCpG siteCpG OligodeoxynucleotideDNA methylationEndosomeBiologyDNAMolecular biologyMethylationToll-Like Receptor 9Cell biologyGeneBiochemistryGene expressionIntracellular

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TLR9 recognizes CpG motifs present in pathogenic DNA and triggers potent immune responses. It is generally accepted that TLR9 distinguishes pathogenic DNA based, in part, on methylation status, where TLR9 binds unmethylated but not methylated CpG. However, we showed that methylated CpG induces potent TLR9-mediated responses when delivered in lipid nanoparticles. In this article, we report that methylation dictates the ability of free CpG DNA to colocalize with TLR9 in late endosomes. However, when delivered in lipid nanoparticles, CpG DNA and TLR9 colocalize, regardless of methylation status. Therefore, it is proposed that the ability of immune cells to distinguish unmethylated pathogenic from methylated mammalian DNA is controlled by a mechanism that regulates TLR9 mobilization and colocalization rather than a differential binding affinity.

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 score0.005

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations45
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207