MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154944447 · doi:10.1155/2009/963037

A Combination of Systemic and Intracranial Anti-CD25 Immunotherapy Elicits a Long-Time Survival in Murine Model of Glioma

2009· article· en· W2154944447 on OpenAlexafffund
Marie-Denise Poirier, Houda Haban, Abdeljabar El Andaloussi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsMedicineImmunotherapyGliomaImmune systemIL-2 receptorCTL*Monoclonal antibodySystemic administrationImmunologyCancer researchAntibodyT cellCD8In vivoBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abrogating the suppression of glioma-infiltrating Tregs in the periphery and the central nervous system is essential to successful glioma rejection. We sought to improve the immune response in glioma-bearing mice, by investigating new strategies using the anti-CD25 immunotherapy. We found a complete long-term survival of glioma-bearing mice treated with a combination of systemic and intracranial anti-CD25 mAb immunotherapy as compared to systemic administration of anti-CD25 mAb. In addition, the group of mice that had been cured by the combined anti-CD25 mAb showed long-term survival without late tumor relapse when challenged with the GL261 glioma. The antitumor immune response was investigated by analysis of antitumor immune response (CTL). Results showed that the use of the combined injections of anti-CD25 mAb induced efficient targeting of Tregs expansion inside and outside of the brain and altered Tregs trafficking in the bone marrow and brain areas where antitumor immunity was primed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of OncologySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207