MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2219198407 · doi:10.1101/sqb.2015.80.027367

Mechanisms Underlying the Selection and Function of Macrophage-Specific Enhancers

2015· review· en· W2219198407 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Verena M. Link, David Gosselin, Christopher K. Glass

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune cells in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthMultiple Sclerosis SocietyNational Institute of General Medical SciencesMultiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
KeywordsEnhancerBiologyEnhancer RNAsCell biologyTranscription factorRegulation of gene expressionPopulationGeneFunction (biology)Gene expressionComputational biologyGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Macrophages populate every tissue of the body and play vital roles in homeostasis, pathogen elimination, and tissue healing. These cells possess the ability to adapt to a multitude of abruptly changing and complex environments. Furthermore, different populations of resident tissue macrophages each show their own defining gene signatures. The enhancer repertoire of these cells underlies both the cellular identity of a given subset of resident macrophage population and their ability to dynamically alter, in an efficient manner, their gene expression programs in response to internal and external signals. Notably, transcription is pervasive at active enhancers and enhancer RNAs, or eRNAs, are tightly correlated to regulated transcription of protein-coding genes. Furthermore, selection and establishment of enhancers is a dynamic and plastic process in which activation of intracellular signaling pathways by factors present in a macrophage's environment play a determining role. Here, we review recent studies providing insights into the distinct mechanisms that contribute to the selection and function of enhancers in macrophages and the relevance of studying these mechanisms to gain a better understanding of complex human diseases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative BiologySame topicImmune cells in cancerFrench-language works237,207