MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811247652 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2018.05.082

Neutrophils Kill Antibody-Opsonized Cancer Cells by Trogoptosis

2018· article· en· W2811247652 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPhagocytosis and Immune Regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersHacettepe ÜniversitesiKWF Kankerbestrijding
KeywordsOpsoninAntibodyCancerCancer cellImmunologyCancer researchBiologyChemistryCell biologyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Destruction of cancer cells by therapeutic antibodies occurs, at least in part, through antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), and this can be mediated by various Fc-receptor-expressing immune cells, including neutrophils. However, the mechanism(s) by which neutrophils kill antibody-opsonized cancer cells has not been established. Here, we demonstrate that neutrophils can exert a mode of destruction of cancer cells, which involves antibody-mediated trogocytosis by neutrophils. Intimately associated with this is an active mechanical disruption of the cancer cell plasma membrane, leading to a lytic (i.e., necrotic) type of cancer cell death. Furthermore, this mode of destruction of antibody-opsonized cancer cells by neutrophils is potentiated by CD47-SIRPα checkpoint blockade. Collectively, these findings show that neutrophil ADCC toward cancer cells occurs by a mechanism of cytotoxicity called trogoptosis, which can be further improved by targeting CD47-SIRPα interactions.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · 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