Adoptive transfer of effector CD8+ T cells derived from central memory cells establishes persistent T cell memory in primates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adoptive transfer of antigen-specific T cells that have been expanded ex vivo is being actively pursued to treat infections and malignancy in humans. The T cell populations that are available for adoptive immunotherapy include both effector memory and central memory cells, and these differ in phenotype, function, and homing. The efficacy of adoptive immunotherapy requires that transferred T cells persist in vivo, but identifying T cells that can reproducibly survive in vivo after they have been numerically expanded by in vitro culture has proven difficult. Here we show that in macaques, antigen-specific CD8(+) T cell clones derived from central memory T cells, but not effector memory T cells, persisted long-term in vivo, reacquired phenotypic and functional properties of memory T cells, and occupied memory T cell niches. These results demonstrate that clonally derived CD8+ T cells isolated from central memory T cells are distinct from those derived from effector memory T cells and retain an intrinsic capacity that enables them to survive after adoptive transfer and revert to the memory cell pool. These results could have significant implications for the selection of T cells to expand or to engineer for adoptive immunotherapy of human infections or malignancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".