MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138051343 · doi:10.1002/stem.2115

In Vitro T-Cell Generation From Adult, Embryonic, and Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: Many Roads to One Destination

2015· review· en· W2138051343 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle J. Smith, Beau R. Webber, Mahmood Mohtashami, Heather E. Stefanski, Juan Carlos Zúñiga‐Pflücker, Bruce R. Blazar

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cells · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyInduced pluripotent stem cellEmbryonic stem cellCell biologyStem cellProgenitor cellHaematopoiesisCellular differentiationIn vitroImmunologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

T lymphocytes are critical mediators of the adaptive immune system and have the capacity to serve as therapeutic agents in the areas of transplant and cancer immunotherapy. While T cells can be isolated and expanded from patients, T cells derived in vitro from both hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (HSPCs) and human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) offer great potential advantages in generating a self-renewing source of T cells that can be readily genetically modified. T-cell differentiation in vivo is a complex process requiring tightly regulated signals; providing the correct signals in vitro to induce T-cell lineage commitment followed by their development into mature, functional, single positive T cells, is similarly complex. In this review, we discuss current methods for the in vitro derivation of T cells from murine and human HSPCs and hPSCs that use feeder-cell and feeder-cell-free systems. Furthermore, we explore their potential for adoption for use in T-cell-based therapies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStem CellsSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207