MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037489782 · doi:10.1042/bst20060283

Manipulation of dendritic cells for host defence against intracellular infections

2006· article· en· W2037489782 on OpenAlexaff
M. Santosuosso, Sarah McCormick, X.Z. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Society Transactions · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmune systemBiologyDendritic cellIntracellular parasiteImmunologyInnate immune systemTransgeneAcquired immune systemCell biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dendritic cells (DCs) are an important innate immune cell type which is the bridge between innate and adaptive immunity. Mounting experimental evidence suggests that manipulating DCs represents a powerful means to enhance host defence against intracellular infectious diseases. We have developed several strategies to manipulate DCs either in vivo or in vitro for the purpose of enhancing the effect of vaccination or immunotherapeutics. In vivo delivery of transgene encoding GM-CSF (granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor), a DC-activating cytokine, increases the number and activation status of DCs at various tissue sites and enhances antimicrobial immune responses in murine models. Co-expression or co-delivery of GM-CSF gene transfer vector with an antimicrobial vaccine enhances microbial antigen-specific T-cell responses and immune protection. Murine bone marrow-derived DCs are being manipulated in vitro and exploited as a vaccine delivery system. Transduction of DCs with a virus-vectored tuberculosis vaccine is a powerful way to activate T-cells in vivo. Such genetically modified DC vaccines can be administered either parenterally or mucosally via the respiratory tract.

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)0.000
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 score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical Society TransactionsSame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207