MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026992198 · doi:10.1002/eji.200939975

CXCR3 blockade inhibits T‐cell migration into the CNS during EAE and prevents development of adoptively transferred, but not actively induced, disease

2010· article· en· W2026992198 on OpenAlexafffund
Romeo A. Sporici, Thomas B. Issekutz

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Immunology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCXCR3T cellBiologyImmunologyAdoptive cell transferBlockadeExperimental autoimmune encephalomyelitisChemokine receptorChemokineReceptorInflammationImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autoreactive T-cell infiltration into the CNS is critical in MS and EAE. The chemokine receptor CXCR3 and its ligands are implicated in MS and mouse EAE, but the contribution of CXCR3 to T-cell migration into the inflamed CNS remains controversial. During active disease in a rat EAE model, blood T-cell, spleen T-cell and T lymphoblast migration into the CNS was inhibited by a CXCR3 blocking mAb by, 30-70%, ∼75% and 50-80%, respectively. However, CXCR3 blockade after active immunization did not inhibit EAE, did not alter total T-cell accumulation in the CNS and did not affect Treg accumulation or the presence of cells producing IFN-γ or IL-17. Conversely, CXCR3 blockade during EAE induced by adoptive transfer of myelin basic protein-activated T cells delayed disease onset, shortened its duration and reduced disease severity. Moreover, CXCR3 blockade inhibited leukocyte infiltration of the CNS>95%, virtually abolishing infiltration of transferred T cells. Thus, CXCR3 plays a major role in T-cell migration to the CNS and can be critical for encephalitogenic T-cell migration into the CNS to induce disease, but CXCR3-independent recruitment can also produce EAE.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations84
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of ImmunologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207