MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090166756 · doi:10.1038/mt.2011.57

Engineering Dendritic Cells to Enhance Cancer Immunotherapy

2011· review· en· W2090166756 on OpenAlexaff
Jeanette E. Boudreau, Aude Bonehill, Kris Thielemans, Yonghong Wan

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Therapy · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmune systemCancer immunotherapyImmunotherapyBiologyPriming (agriculture)Dendritic cellAntigen presentationAntigenImmunologyT cellCell biologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer immunotherapy aims to establish immune-mediated control of tumor growth by priming T-cell responses to target tumor-associated antigens. Three signals are required for T-cell activation: (i) presentation of cognate antigen in self MHC molecules; (ii) costimulation by membrane-bound receptor-ligand pairs; and (iii) soluble factors to direct polarization of the ensuing immune response. The ability of dendritic cells (DCs) to provide all three signals required for T-cell activation makes them an ideal cancer vaccine platform. Several strategies have been developed to enhance and control antigen presentation, costimulation, and cytokine production. In this review, we discuss progress toward developing DC-based cancer vaccines by genetic modification using RNA, DNA, and recombinant viruses. Furthermore, the ability of DC-based vaccines to activate natural killer (NK) and B-cells, and the impact of gene modification strategies on these populations is described. Clinical trials using gene-modified DCs have shown modest results, therefore, further considerations for DC manipulation to enhance their clinical efficacy are also discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations123
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueMolecular TherapySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207