MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995945086 · doi:10.1182/blood-2011-04-350868

Next-generation leukemia immunotherapy

2011· review· en· W1995945086 on OpenAlexafffund
Krystel Vincent, Denis‐Claude Roy, Claude Perreault

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de MontréalInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsImmunotherapyAdoptive immunotherapyImmunologyLeukemiaTransplantationHematopoietic stem cell transplantationCancer immunotherapyHematopoietic cellT cellMedicineCancerHaematopoiesisAdoptive cell transferImmune systemCancer researchBiologyStem cellInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation led to the discovery of the allogeneic GVL effect, which remains the most convincing evidence that immune cells can cure cancer in humans. However, despite its great paradigmatic and clinical relevance, induction of GVL by conventional allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation remains a quite rudimentary form of leukemia immunotherapy. It is toxic and its efficacy is far from optimal. It is therefore sobering that since the discovery of the GVL effect 3 decades ago, the way GVL is induced and manipulated has practically not changed. Preclinical and clinical studies suggest that injection of T cells primed against a single Ag present on neoplastic cells could enhance the GVL effect without causing any GVHD. We therefore contend that Ag-targeted adoptive T-cell immunotherapy represents the future of leukemia immunotherapy, and we discuss the specific strategies that ought to be evaluated to reach this goal. Differences between these strategies hinge on 2 key elements: the nature of the target Ag and the type of Ag receptor expressed on T cells.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations71
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207