MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060967240 · doi:10.1097/tp.0b013e31816f22d6

Superiority of Bone Marrow-Derived Dendritic Cells Over Monocyte-Derived Ones for the Expansion of Regulatory T Cells in the Macaque

2008· article· en· W2060967240 on OpenAlexaff
Aurélie Moreau, Elise Chiffoleau, Gaëlle Bériou, Jack‐Yves Deschamps, Michèle Heslan, Joanna Ashton‐Chess, Fabienne Rolling, Régis Josien, Philippe Moullier, María Cristina Cuturi, Brigitte Alliot‐Licht

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsFOXP3ImmunologyDendritic cellBiologyIL-2 receptorInterleukin-7 receptorCD14Regulatory T cellBone marrowImmune systemImmune toleranceT cellCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regulatory T cells (Treg) have been identified as playing a pivotal role in the control of tolerance and in the suppression of pathologic immune responses in autoimmune diseases, transplantation, and graft-versus-host disease. Treg expanded ex vivo by dendritic cells could be potential reagents to promote antigen-specific tolerance in vivo. However, in vivo studies have been carried out mostly in rodents and will need validation in primates before clinical application. We characterized macaque dendritic cell derived either from bone marrow with and without prior CD34+ cell selection (BMDC), or from CD14+ peripheral blood mononuclear cells (Mo-DC). We demonstrate that with a semi-mature phenotype, BMDC are superior to Mo-DC in their capacity to expand freshly isolated allogeneic macaque CD4+ CD25+ CD127- Foxp3+ Treg in vitro in the presence of interleukin-2. Moreover, the expanded Treg maintain their phenotype and suppressive activity. These data provide a step toward the use of macaque dendritic cell to expand Treg for future preclinical testing.

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207