MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986200302 · doi:10.3109/08830180009088512

Pathogenic Thyroglobulin Peptides as Model Antigens: Insights on the Induction and Maintenance of Autoimmune Thyroiditis

2000· review· en· W1986200302 on OpenAlexaff
George Carayanniotis, Yi-Chim Kong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Reviews of Immunology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsThyroglobulinEpitopeImmunologyThyroiditisAntigenAutoimmune thyroiditisImmune systemBiologyAutoimmune diseasePathogenesisThyroidComputational biologyAntibodyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the discovery of pathogenic thyroglobulin (Tg) peptides has given a new impetus to study, at the basic level, mechanisms of induction and immunoregulation of autoimmune thyroiditis. The genetic control of the immune response against defined Tg epitopes and the diversity of the T-cell receptor repertoire recruited for their recognition were among the first issues examined. Some of these epitopes contained hormonogenic sites, i.e. thyroxine residues, and thus offered an excellent opportunity to study how post-translational modifications such as iodination, can influence induction of thyroiditogenic cells. The delineation of pathogenic Tg determinants also enabled the search for "molecular mimics" i.e. peptides of microbial origin that may be involved in the pathogenesis of the disease. In addition, factors promoting the generation of pathogenic epitopes during Tg processing in antigen presenting cells could now be systematically investigated. This review summarizes recent findings in these areas.

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations19
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Reviews of ImmunologySame topicThyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207