MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979361121 · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-12484-z

Human placental trophoblast cells contribute to maternal–fetal tolerance through expressing IL-35 and mediating iTR35 conversion

2019· article· en· W2979361121 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jia Liu, Shengnan Hao, Xi Chen, Hui Zhao, Lutao Du, Hanxiao Ren, Chuanxin Wang, Haiting Mao

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive System and Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceQueen's UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaTaishan Scholar Foundation of Shandong Province
KeywordsTrophoblastPlacentaFetusCell biologyBiologyPregnancyAndrologyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During pregnancy, trophoblast cells sustain the maternal–fetal tolerance via expressing and secreting various chemokines and cytokines. Our previous study revealed the expression of interleukin-35 (IL-35) in human first-trimester trophoblasts. Here we show that IL-35 is expressed in both human first-trimester primary trophoblast cells and a trophoblast cell line. Trophoblast cells inhibit the proliferation of human naive conventional T cells (T conv cells) and convert suppressed T conv cells into iT R 35 in an IL-35-dependent manner. Mechanistically, trophoblast cell derived IL-35 mediates its function through phosphorylation of STAT1 and STAT3. In vivo studies confirm that mice with immunologically spontaneous abortion have lower levels of IL-35 and iT R 35 cells at the maternal–fetal interface, and neutralizing anti-IL-35 mAb enhances abortion rates. Meanwhile, exogenous IL-35 induces iT R 35 and prevents immunological abortion. Our findings thus suggest that trophoblast cells have a critical function in preserving maternal–fetal tolerance via secreting IL-35 during pregnancy.

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 score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations59
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicReproductive System and PregnancyFrench-language works237,207