Cure of metastatic growth of EMT6 tumor cells in mice following manipulation of CD200:CD200R signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In previous studies, we observed that regulation of expression of CD200, both on cells of a transplantable breast cancer, EMT6, and of the host, as well as of the receptor, CD200R in host mice, regulated local tumor growth and metastasis in immunocompetent animals. This in turn led to an improved ability to document immunity to EMT6 in CD200R1KO mice. In the current study, we have explored the ability to cure BALB/c CD200KO or CD200R1KO mice of tumors ≤1 cm(3) in size by surgical resection of localized tumor, followed by immunization with irradiated EMT6 cells along with CpG as adjuvant. While control animals treated in this fashion developed significant pulmonary and liver metastases within 30 days of surgery, significant protection was seen in both CD200KO or CD200R1KO mice, with no macroscopic lung/liver metastases observed in CD200R1KO mice on sacrifice at day 300. Following surgical resection and immunization, draining lymph nodes from control mice contained tumor cells cloned at limiting dilution in vitro even before pulmonary and hepatic metastasis was seen. In contrast, within the limits of detection of the assay used (sensitivity ~1 in 10(7) cells), no tumor cells were detected at limiting dilution in similarly treated CD200R1KO mice, and significant reductions were seen in CD200KO mice. Infusion of anti-CD4, but less so anti-CD8, mAb into surgically treated and immunized CD200R1KO mice attenuated protection from both macroscopic (liver/lung) and microscopic (assayed by limiting dilution of DLN) metastasis. Adoptive transfer of lymphocytes from treated CD200R1KO mice to surgically treated control mice also attenuated metastatic growth of tumor, which was abolished by pretreatment of transferred cells with anti-CD4 mAb. Our data suggest that CD200:CD200R attenuates a potentially tumor-protective CD4 host response to breast cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".