Depletion of CD4<sup>+</sup>CD25<sup>+</sup>CD127<sup>lo</sup> regulatory T cells does not increase allergen‐driven T cell activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that allergic diseases are caused by defective suppression of allergen-specific Th2 cells by CD4(+)CD25(+) regulatory T cells. However, such studies have been hampered by the difficulty in distinguishing regulatory T cells from CD25-expressing activated T cells. Recently, it was shown that conventional T cells expressed high levels of CD127, whereas regulatory T cells were CD127(lo), allowing discrimination between these distinct T cell subpopulations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to study whether the putative regulatory subset defined as CD4(+)CD25(+)CD127(lo) was involved in grass pollen-reactive T cell responses. METHODS: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were obtained from allergic donors and non-atopic controls out of season. Grass pollen-induced cytokine production and proliferation were compared in cultures of undepleted cells and cells depleted of CD4(+)CD25(+), CD4(+)CD25(+)CD127(hi) or CD4(+)CD25(+)CD127(lo) T cells. RESULTS: Undepleted cell cultures from allergic patients showed significantly increased proliferation and Th2 cytokine production compared with non-atopic controls. Depletion of all CD25(+) T cells did not increase cytokine production or proliferation, and more importantly, no increase in Th2 cytokine production or proliferation was observed in cell cultures depleted of CD4(+)CD25(+)CD127(lo) cells (putative regulatory T cells) compared with undepleted PBMCs in both the allergic and the non-atopic group. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that T cells from grass pollen-allergic patients and non-atopic controls responded very differently to grass pollen extract, but this difference could not be explained by differences in regulatory T cell function. Further studies are needed to understand the importance of regulatory T cells in allergy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".