MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991168856 · doi:10.1182/blood.v98.7.2275

Distinct regulatory elements are required for faithful expression of human CD4 in T cells, macrophages, and dendritic cells of transgenic mice

2001· article· en· W1991168856 on OpenAlexaff
Zaher Hanna, Najet Rebaï, Johanne Poudrier, Paul Jolicoeur

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCell biologyTransgeneEnhancerRegulation of gene expressionGene expressionMolecular biologyRegulatory sequenceCD8Immune systemGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To identify the regulatory elements controlling expression of the human CD4 (hCD4) gene in different cell types of the immune system, deletion and chimeric (human/murine) reporter genes were constructed and tested in transgenic (Tg) mice. Regulatory elements required for the proper hCD4 expression in the immature double-positive thymic T cells were identified in the enhancer and in the 3' end of intron 1. Expression of hCD4 in macrophages is controlled by at least 2 sets of regulatory elements: one present in front of exon 1 and the second at the 5' end of intron 1. The hCD4 elements required for expression on both myeloid and lymphoid CD8alpha(+) dendritic cells (DCs) from lymph node and thymus were found to be different from those required for macrophage expression. The results indicate that expression of hCD4 in T cells, macrophages, and DCs is controlled by distinct regulatory elements.

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 score0.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations24
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207