MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980046832 · doi:10.3109/08820139.2012.689405

Host Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase: Contribution to Systemic Acquired Tumor Tolerance

2012· review· en· W1980046832 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Theodore S. Johnson, David H. Munn

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunological Investigations · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTryptophan and brain disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsIndoleamine 2,3-dioxygenaseImmune toleranceImmunologyImmune systemBiologyStromal cellImmunologic ToleranceCancer researchTransplantationEndogenyMechanism (biology)Tumor microenvironmentMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) is a natural mechanism of creating acquired tolerance in a variety of physiological settings. This endogenous tolerogenic pathway has important functions in regulating the magnitude of immune responses in settings of infection, pregnancy, tissue transplantation, mucosal interfaces and others. Whether for angiogenesis, stromal formation or immunologic tolerance, tumors often rely on recruiting host mechanisms. IDO is one such potent endogenous mechanism that appears to be frequently hijacked by tumors to establish systemic immune tolerance to tumor antigens. IDO can be expressed by tumors themselves, but, in addition, its natural site of expression is the host immune cells recruited by the tumor (particularly dendritic cells and macrophages). Therapeutic strategies that target the IDO pathway have been shown to synergize with standard chemotherapy and experimental immunotherapies to break tumor-induced tolerance. When such strategies target IDO expressed in host cells, they may be able to disrupt tolerance without creating intrinsic tumor cell drug resistance.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations91
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunological InvestigationsSame topicTryptophan and brain disordersFrench-language works237,207