MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Potential of CpG Oligodeoxynucleotides as Mucosal Adjuvants

2001· article· en· W1984703936 on OpenAlexaff
Risini D. Weeratna, Paul Payette, Heather L. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Immunology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCpG OligodeoxynucleotideAdjuvantCpG siteImmune systemAntigenDNATLR9ImmunologyBiologyNucleaseChemistryDNA methylationGeneGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of mucosal vaccines for humans has been hindered by the lack of safe yet effective mucosal adjuvants. Bacterial toxins are commonly used as adjuvants in animal models, but they are too toxic for use in humans. A novel class of adjuvant is CpG DNA, which contains unmethylated CpG dinucleotides in particular base contexts (CpG motifs). CpG DNA is most often coadministered with antigen in the form of synthetic oligodeoxynucleotides (CpG ODN), which are made with a nuclease-resistant phosphorothioate backbone. The vast majority of studies using CpG DNA as adjuvant have been with parenteral delivery; recently, however, mucosal immunization with CpG DNA as adjuvant has also been shown to induce both systemic (humoral and cellular) and mucosal antigen-specific immune responses. This review will highlight the recent uses of CpG DNA as an adjuvant at mucosal surfaces.

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 score0.001
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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations41
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in ImmunologySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207