Control of type 1 diabetes by CD4<sup>+</sup>Foxp3<sup>+</sup> regulatory T cells: lessons from mouse models and implications for human disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, there has been a revival of the concept of CD4(+) regulatory T (T(reg)) cells as being a central control point in various immune responses, including autoimmune responses and immunity to transplants, allergens, tumours and infectious microbes. The current literature suggests that T(reg) cells are diverse in their phenotype and mechanism(s) of action, and as such, may constitute a myriad of naturally occurring and induced T cell precursors with variable degrees of regulatory potential. In this review, we summarize research from various laboratories, including our own, showing that CD4(+)Foxp3(+) T(reg) cells are critical in the control of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in mouse models and humans. In this review, we also discuss cellular and molecular determinants that impact CD4(+)Foxp3(+) T(reg) cell development and function and consequential resistance to organ-specific autoimmune disease. Recent advances in the use of CD4(+)Foxp3(+) T(reg) cellular therapy to promote immunological tolerance in the absence of long-term generalized immunosuppression are also presented.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".