TNF receptor 1 (TNFR1) and CD95 are not required for T cell deletion after virus infection but contribute to peptide-induced deletion under limited conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deletion of mature T cells maintains cellular homeostasis and is involved in the maintenance of self tolerance to some peripheral self antigens. Previous studies have presented conflicting evidence for a role of the tumor necrosis factor receptor (TNFR) family member CD95 (Fas) in peripheral T cell deletion using CD95-deficient mice. To evaluate cooperation between CD95 and another TNFR family molecule, TNFR1, we generated mice deficient for both CD95 and TNFR1. We showed that TNFR1 and CD95 do not contribute to the decline of antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes after virus infection. Using TNFR1 / CD95-deficient mice expressing the P14 TCR specific for a lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus-derived peptide (p33) we showed that deletion of p33-specific CD8(+) T cells following high dose p33 administration is also normal. However, in non-TCR-transgenic TNFR1 / CD95-deficient mice treated with the same p33 regimen, tolerance induction was defective. These data indicate that TNFR1 and CD95 are dispensable for deletion of antigen-specific T cells after viral infection. However, under certain conditions, both TNFR1 and CD95 appear to cooperate in CD8(+) T cell deletion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".