MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017325329 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1013084108

Single-cell gene-expression profiling reveals qualitatively distinct CD8 T cells elicited by different gene-based vaccines

2011· article· en· W2017325329 on OpenAlexaff
Lukas Flatz, Rahul Roychoudhuri, Mitsuo Honda, Abdelali Filali‐Mouhim, Jean-Philippe Goulet, Nadia Kettaf, Min Lin, Mario Roederer, Elias K. Haddad, Rafick‐Pierre Sékaly, Gary J. Nabel

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCytotoxic T cellCD8T cellGene expression profilingImmune systemDNA vaccinationCXCR3Gene expressionCell biologyGeneImmunologyGeneticsChemokineChemokine receptorImmunization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CD8 T cells play a key role in mediating protective immunity against selected pathogens after vaccination. Understanding the mechanism of this protection is dependent upon definition of the heterogeneity and complexity of cellular immune responses generated by different vaccines. Here, we identify previously unrecognized subsets of CD8 T cells based upon analysis of gene-expression patterns within single cells and show that they are differentially induced by different vaccines. Three prime-boost vector combinations encoding HIV Env stimulated antigen-specific CD8 T-cell populations of similar magnitude, phenotype, and functionality. Remarkably, however, analysis of single-cell gene-expression profiles enabled discrimination of a majority of central memory (CM) and effector memory (EM) CD8 T cells elicited by the three vaccines. Subsets of T cells could be defined based on their expression of Eomes, Cxcr3, and Ccr7, or Klrk1, Klrg1, and Ccr5 in CM and EM cells, respectively. Of CM cells elicited by DNA prime-recombinant adenoviral (rAd) boost vectors, 67% were Eomes(-) Ccr7(+) Cxcr3(-), in contrast to only 7% and 2% stimulated by rAd5-rAd5 or rAd-LCMV, respectively. Of EM cells elicited by DNA-rAd, 74% were Klrk1(-) Klrg1(-)Ccr5(-) compared with only 26% and 20% for rAd5-rAd5 or rAd5-LCMV. Definition by single-cell gene profiling of specific CM and EM CD8 T-cell subsets that are differentially induced by different gene-based vaccines will facilitate the design and evaluation of vaccines, as well as enable our understanding of mechanisms of protective immunity.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations92
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207