MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156856697 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0901518

TRIL, a Functional Component of the TLR4 Signaling Complex, Highly Expressed in Brain

2009· article· en· W2156856697 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Carpenter, Thaddeus Carlson, Jérôme Dellacasagrande, Amaya Garcia, Sharon Gibbons, Paul J. Hertzog, Anthony Lyons, Lih‐Ling Lin, Marina A. Lynch, Tom P. Monie, Caroline Murphy, Katherine J. Seidl, Christine A. Wells, Aisling Dunne, Luke O'neill

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCell biologyTLR4BiologyHEK 293 cellsGene knockdownSignal transductionStimulationTransmembrane proteinMolecular biologyCell cultureReceptorNeuroscienceBiochemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TLR4 is the primary sensor of LPS. In this study, we describe for the first time TLR4 interactor with leucine-rich repeats (TRIL), which is a novel component of the TLR4 complex. TRIL is expressed in a number of tissues, most prominently in the brain but also in the spinal cord, lung, kidney, and ovary. TRIL is composed of a signal sequence, 13 leucine-rich repeats, a fibronectin domain, and a single transmembrane spanning region. TRIL is induced by LPS in the human astrocytoma cell line U373, in murine brain following i.p. injection, and in human PBMC. Endogenous TRIL interacts with TLR4 and this interaction is greatly enhanced following LPS stimulation. TRIL also interacts with the TLR4 ligand LPS. Furthermore, U373 cells stably overexpressing TRIL display enhanced cytokine production in response to LPS. Finally, knockdown of TRIL using small interfering RNA attenuates LPS signaling and cytokine production in cell lines, human PBMC, and primary murine mixed glial cells. These results demonstrate that TRIL is a novel component of the TLR4 complex which may have particular relevance for the functional role of TLR4 in the brain.

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 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 score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations54
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207