MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067422236 · doi:10.1038/sj.mt.6300130

On the Role of CD4+ T Cells in the CD8+ T-Cell Response Elicited by Recombinant Adenovirus Vaccines

2007· article· en· W2067422236 on OpenAlexafffund
Teng Chih Yang, James Millar, Timothy Groves, Wenzhong Zhou, Natalie Grinshtein, Robin Parsons, Carole Evelegh, Zhou Xing, Yonghong Wan, Jonathan L. Bramson

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Therapy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster University
KeywordsVirologyRecombinant DNACytotoxic T cellT cellCD8BiologyImmunologyImmune systemIn vitroGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have investigated the role of CD4(+) T cells in the development of the CD8(+) T-cell response after immunization with recombinant adenovirus (rAd). In the absence of CD4(+) T cells, the "unhelped" CD8(+) T-cell population exhibited a reduction in primary expansion and long-term survival that appeared to be due to inadequate priming of naïve T cells. There were few functional or phenotypic differences between the helped and unhelped CD8(+) T-cell populations with the exception of O-glycosylated CD43, a marker of effector cells, which was augmented on the unhelped CD8(+) T-cell population. In some cases, the unhelped CD8(+) T-cell population exhibited reduced ability to control virus infection; however, this appeared to be a function of the reduced frequency of antigen-specific CD8(+) T cells. Most notably, the unhelped CD8(+) T-cell population exhibited no defect in secondary expansion. These results provide insight into the role of CD4(+) T cells during the primary CD8(+) T-cell response generated by rAd vaccines and identify potential benefits and issues that must be considered when using adenovirus vaccines under conditions where CD4(+) T-cell function may be limiting, such as vaccination of human immunodeficiency virus patients.

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)0.003
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.270
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations40
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular TherapySame topicVirus-based gene therapy researchFrench-language works237,207