Death receptor 4 is preferentially recruited to lipid rafts in chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells contributing to tumor necrosis related apoptosis inducing ligand-induced synergistic apoptotic responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tumor necrosis related apoptosis inducing ligand receptor 1 (TRAIL-R1, death receptor 4 [DR4]) and TRAIL-R2 (DR5) have been proposed as targets for cancer therapy, but which death receptor to target for chemotherapy in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is uncertain. Herein, we discovered that Burkitt lymphoma B cell line, BJAB, CLL-like cell line, I-83, and pre-acute lymphocytic leukemia B cell line, NALM-6, underwent apoptosis following TRAIL, whereas a CLL-like cell line, JMV-3, and primary CLL cells failed to undergo apoptosis. In TRAIL resistant CLL cells, only activation of DR4 provided an increase in fludarabine induced apoptosis. This was mediated in part by the localization of DR4 but not DR5 in lipid rafts following TRAIL and fludarabine treatment. This preference for DR4 activation leading to increased fludarabine induced apoptosis was also observed following SAHA, PS-341, and chlorambucil treatment in primary CLL cells. Thus, CLL cells selectively activate DR4 partially mediated through its localization to lipid rafts leading to apoptosis when combined with chemotherapeutic drugs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".