The Testicular-Derived Sertoli Cell: Cellular Immunoscience to Enable Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a renewed enthusiasm for the potential of cellular transplantation as a therapy for numerous clinical disorders. The revived interest is largely due to the unprecedented success of the "Edmonton protocol," which produced a 100% cure rate for type I diabetics following the transplantation of human islet allografts together with a modified immunosuppressive regimen. While these data provide a clear and unequivocal demonstration that transplantation is a viable treatment strategy, the shortage of suitable donor tissue together with the debilitating consequences of lifelong immunosuppression necessitate a concerted effort to develop novel means to enable transplantation on a widespread basis. This review outlines the use of Sertoli cells to provide local immunoprotection to cografted discordant cells, including those from xenogeneic sources. Sertoli cells are normally found in the testes where one of their functions is to provide local immunologic protection to developing germ cells. Isolated Sertoli cells 1) engraft and self-protect when transplanted into allogeneic and xenogeneic environments, 2) protect cografted allogeneic and xenogeneic cells from immune destruction, 3) protect islet grafts to reverse diabetes in animal models, 4) enable survival and function of cografted foreign dopaminergic neurons in rodent models of Parkinson's disease (PD), and 5) promote regeneration of damaged striatal dopaminergic circuitry in those same PD models. These benefits are discussed in the context of several potential underlying biological mechanisms. While the majority of work to date has focused on Sertoli cells to facilitate transplantation for diabetes and PD, the generalized ability of these unique cells to potently suppress the local immune environment opens additional clinical possibilities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".