MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167820901 · doi:10.1186/1471-2172-3-1

Phorbol esters and CAMP differentially regulate the expression of CD4 and CD8 in human thymocytes

2002· article· en· W2167820901 on OpenAlexaff
Héctor Martínez-Valdez, Vicente Madrid‐Marina, Amos Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Immunology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCD8BiologyCell biologyT-cell receptorProtein kinase CCytotoxic T cellThymocyteT cellSignal transductionMolecular biologyAntigenImmunologyImmune systemGeneticsIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intrathymic development and selection of the T lymphocyte repertoire is restricted by the interactions of the T cell antigen receptor and CD4 or CD8 co-receptors with self major histocompatibility complex molecules. Positive or negative selection depends on a tight regulatory control of CD4 and CD8 expression. Determining the intracellular signals that differentially regulate the expression of CD4 and CD8 is important to understand the mechanisms that are implicated in selection of single positive CD4+CD8- or CD4-CD8+. RESULTS: The present study shows that stimulation of human thymocytes by phorbol esters or cAMP result in a differential regulation of CD4 and CD8 expression, both at the mRNA and cell surface glycoprotein level. CONCLUSIONS: The differential regulation of CD4 and CD8 gene expression suggests that the selective activation of protein kinase C (PKC) and cAMP-dependent protein kinases (PKA) may be required for the selection of single positive CD4+CD8- and CD4-CD8+ cells during Intrathymic differentiation.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations27
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC ImmunologySame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207