Immunodomination results from functional differences between competing CTL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of dominant epitopes suppresses generation of CTL activity toward other non-dominant epitopes found on the same antigen-presenting cell (APC). This phenomenon, termed immunodomination, drastically restricts the diversity of the repertoire of CTL responses. Under various experimental conditions we assessed the in vivo expansion by tetramer staining and function by expression of O-glycans and intracellular perforin of CTL specific for a dominant (B6(dom1)) and a non-dominant (HY) H2D(b)-restricted epitope. Immunodomination abrogated expansion rather than differentiation of HY-specific CTL. When immunodomination was precluded because HY was presented alone or because high numbers of antigen-bearing APC were present, the numbers of HY-specific T cells detected after antigen priming were similar to those of B6(dom1)-specific T cells. The main difference between T cells that recognized B6(dom1) versus HY was functional rather than quantitative. The key feature of T cells specific for B6(dom1) is that they show striking up-regulation of molecules involved in CTL effector activity rather than accumulating to particularly high levels, as assessed by tetramer staining. These results support the emerging concept that following antigen priming, CTL populations of similar size can display important differences in effector function, and suggest that these functional differences are instrumental in shaping the repertoire of CTL responses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".