MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Role of host phosphotyrosine phosphatase SHP-1 in the development of murine leishmaniasis

2001· article· en· W2011847303 on OpenAlexafffund
Geneviève Forget, K A Siminovitch, Sébastien Brochu, Serge Rivest, Danuta Radzioch, Martin Olivier

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Immunology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchArthritis Society
KeywordsBiologyProtein tyrosine phosphataseLeishmaniaCell biologyPhosphorylationSignal transductionNitric oxide synthaseNitric oxidePhosphataseImmunologyParasite hosting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Activation of host phosphotyrosine phosphatase SHP-1 by Leishmania and its subsequent impact on tyrosine phosphorylation-based signaling cascades were shown to represent an important mechanism whereby this pathogen may alter host cell functions. Herein, we report that Leishmania-induced macrophage SHP-1 activity is necessary for its survival within phagocytes through the attenuation of nitric oxide-dependent and -independent microbicidal mechanisms. In vivo, Leishmania major infection, which footpad inflammation is mostly undetectable in SHP-1-deficient viable motheaten mice, was accompanied by increased inducible nitric oxide synthase and activation of neutrophils. These enhanced cellular activities were paralleled by a marked activation of signaling events usually negatively regulated by SHP-1. Overall, this study firmly establishes that modulation of the signaling terminator SHP-1 by Leishmania is essential for its installment and propagation.

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 score0.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations95
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of ImmunologySame topicResearch on Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207