No evidence for cell‐to‐cell transmission of the unfolded protein response in cell culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The unfolded protein response (UPR) is one of the major cell-autonomous proteostatic stress responses. The UPR has been implicated in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases and is therefore actively investigated as therapeutic target. In this respect, cell non-autonomous effects of the UPR including the reported cell-to-cell transmission of UPR activity may be highly important. A pharmaca-based UPR induction was employed to generate conditioned media (CM) from CM-donating neuronal ('donor') cells (SK-N-SH and primary mouse neurons). As previously reported, upon subsequent transfer of CM to naive neuronal 'acceptor' cells, we confirmed UPR target mRNA and protein expression by qPCR and automated microscopy. However, UPR target gene expression was also induced in the absence of donor cells, indicating carry-over of pharmaca. Genetic induction of single pathways of the UPR in donor cells did not result in UPR transmission to acceptor cells. Moreover, no transmission was detected upon full UPR activation by nutrient deprivation or inducible expression of the heavy chain of immunoglobulin M in donor HeLa cells. In addition, in direct co-culture of donor cells expressing the immunoglobulin M heavy chain and fluorescent UPR reporter acceptor HeLa cells, UPR transmission was not observed. In conclusion, carry-over of pharmaca is a major confounding factor in pharmaca-based UPR transmission protocols that are therefore unsuitable to study cell-to-cell UPR transmission. In addition, the absence of UPR transmission in non-pharmaca-based models of UPR activation indicates that cell-to-cell UPR transmission does not occur in cell culture.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
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".