The Diabetes Susceptibility Locus <i>Idd5.1</i> on Mouse Chromosome 1 Regulates ICOS Expression and Modulates Murine Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linkage analysis and congenic mapping in NOD mice have identified a susceptibility locus for type 1 diabetes, Idd5.1 on mouse chromosome 1, which includes the Ctla4 and Icos genes. Besides type 1 diabetes, numerous autoimmune diseases have been mapped to a syntenic region on human chromosome 2q33. In this study we determined how the costimulatory molecules encoded by these genes contribute to the immunopathogenesis of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE). When we compared levels of expression of costimulatory molecules on T cells, we found higher ICOS and lower full-length CTLA-4 expression on activated NOD T cells compared with C57BL/6 (B6) and C57BL/10 (B10) T cells. Using NOD.B10 Idd5 congenic strains, we determined that a 2.1-Mb region controls the observed expression differences of ICOS. Although Idd5.1 congenic mice are resistant to diabetes, we found them more susceptible to myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein 35-55-induced EAE compared with NOD mice. Our data demonstrate that higher ICOS expression correlates with more IL-10 production by NOD-derived T cells, and this may be responsible for the less severe EAE in NOD mice compared with Idd5.1 congenic mice. Paradoxically, alleles at the Idd5.1 locus have opposite effects on two autoimmune diseases, diabetes and EAE. This may reflect differential roles for costimulatory pathways in inducing autoimmune responses depending upon the origin (tissue) of the target Ag.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".