MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094772566 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6600951

Expression of costimulatory molecules in human neuroblastoma. Evidence that CD40+ neuroblastoma cells undergo apoptosis following interaction with CD40L

2003· article· en· W2094772566 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Irma Airoldi, Susanna Lualdi, Silvia Bruno, Lizzia Raffaghello, Marzia Occhino, Claudio Gambini, Vito Pistoia, Maria Valeria Corrias

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council CanadaFondazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroAssociazione Italiana per la Lotta al Neuroblastoma
KeywordsCD40CD80CD86Flow cytometryNeuroblastomaBiologyMolecular biologyCell cultureApoptosisTransfectionCancer researchCell biologyT cellIn vitroImmune systemImmunologyCytotoxic T cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tumour cells display low to absent expression of costimulatory molecules. Here, we have investigated the expression of costimulatory molecules (CD40, CD80, CD86, PD-1L, B7H2, OX40L and 4-1BBL) in human neuroblastoma (NB) cells, since virtually no information is available on this issue. Both established NB cell lines and primary tumours were tested by RT-PCR and flow cytometry. Neuroblastoma cell lines expressed the transcripts of all costimulatory molecule genes, but not the corresponding proteins. Culture of NB cell lines with human recombinant (r)IFN-gamma induced surface expression of CD40 in half of them. Primary NB cells showed CD40, CD80, CD86, OX40L, 4-1BBL, but not PD-1L and B7H2, mRNA expression. Surface CD40 was consistently detected on primary NB cells by flow cytometry. Interferon-gamma gene-transfected NB cells expressed constitutively surface CD40 and were induced into apoptosis by incubation with rCD40L through a caspase-8-dependent mechanism. CD40 may represent a novel therapeutic target in NB.

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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations34
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207