MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559761446 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.11.035

The Csk-Associated Adaptor PAG Inhibits Effector T Cell Activation in Cooperation with Phosphatase PTPN22 and Dok Adaptors

2016· article· en· W2559761446 on OpenAlexafffund
Dominique Davidson, Ming‐Chao Zhong, Pier Paolo Pandolfi, Silvia Bolland, Ramnik J. Xavier, Brian Seed, Xin Li, Hua Gu, André Veillette

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalMontreal Clinical Research Institute
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCell biologyEffectorSignal transducing adaptor proteinProtein tyrosine phosphataseProto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase SrcBiologyT cellSignal transductionChemistryImmunologyImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transmembrane adaptor PAG (Cbp) has been proposed to mediate membrane recruitment of Csk, a cytoplasmic protein tyrosine kinase playing a critical inhibitory role during T cell activation, by inactivating membrane-associated Src kinases. However, this model has not been validated by genetic evidence. Here, we demonstrate that PAG-deficient mice display enhanced T cell activation responses in effector, but not in naive, T cells. PAG-deficient mice also have augmented T cell-dependent autoimmunity and greater resistance to T cell anergy. Interestingly, in the absence of PAG, Csk becomes more associated with alternative partners; i.e., phosphatase PTPN22 and Dok adaptors. Combining PAG deficiency with PTPN22 or Dok adaptor deficiency further enhances effector T cell responses. Unlike PAG, Cbl ubiquitin ligases inhibit the activation of naive, but not of effector, T cells. Thus, Csk-associating PAG is a critical component of the inhibitory machinery controlling effector T cell activation in cooperation with PTPN22 and Dok adaptors.

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)0.000
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations47
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207