MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Discrete Monoclonal Antibodies Define Functionally Important Epitopes in the CD200 Molecule Responsible for Immunosuppression Function

2005· article· en· W1996402832 on OpenAlexaff
Dang-Xiao Chen, Reginald M. Gorczynski

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpitopeMonoclonal antibodyMolecular biologyAntibodyCytotoxic T cellBiologyT cellFusion proteinMajor histocompatibility complexAntigenImmune systemImmunologyBiochemistryRecombinant DNAIn vitroGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Both murine and human CD200 fusion proteins (CD200Fc) act as immunosuppressants after engagement of cell-bound receptors (CD200R). Anti-CD200 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) augment activity in mixed leukocyte cultures (MLCs) (increased cytotoxic T lymphocyte/cytokine production) after neutralization of endogenous CD200 activity. Previous studies documented critical regions in the N-terminal domains of both CD200 and CD200R1 for ligand:receptor binding and defined a number of synthetic CD200 and CD200R peptides that antagonize that interaction. METHODS: We used a panel of mAbs to mouse and human CD200Fc to compare the rank activities of antibodies for binding (flow cytometric analysis [FACS] or enzyme-linked immunoadsorbent assay [ELISA]) to CD200 with their abilities to augment immune reactivity in MLCs. RESULTS: Only mAbs defining epitopes in the N-terminal domain could augment MLC reactivity (or block immunosuppression by soluble CD200Fc), whereas mAbs targeting C-domain epitopes, although reactive in ELISA or FACS (targeting cell surface CD200), were inactive in MLCs. CONCLUSION: In addition to defining the importance of N-terminal epitopes for CD200 function, rank comparison of mAbs for FACS staining of CD200 expressed on various cell types indicates heterogeneity in expressed CD200.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207