MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980045862 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2019.09.003

CD109 Restrains Activation of Cutaneous IL-17-Producing γδ T Cells by Commensal Microbiota

2019· article· en· W2980045862 on OpenAlexafffund
Hualin Zhang, Giustino Carnevale, Barbara Polese, Mélissa Simard, Bavanitha Thurairajah, Nargis Khan, Maria E. Gentile, Ghislaine Fontès, Donald C. Vinh, Roxane Pouliot, Irah L. King

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité LavalHôpital de l'Enfant-JésusMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéKenneth Rainin Foundation
KeywordsCell biologyInterleukin 17InflammationBiologyImmune systemHomeostasisImmunologyContext (archaeology)Innate immune systemRegulatorInterleukin 22Interleukin 23T cellInterleukinCytokineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interleukin-17-producing γδ T (γδ17) cells play a central role in protective and pathogenic immune responses. However, the tissue-specific mechanisms that control the activation of these innate lymphocytes are not known. Here, we demonstrate that CD109, a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored protein highly expressed by keratinocytes, is an important regulator of skin homeostasis and γδ17 cell activation. Genetic deletion of CD109 results in spontaneous epidermal hyperplasia, aberrant accumulation of dermal-derived γδ17 cells, and enhanced susceptibility to psoriasiform inflammation. In this context, γδ17 activation requires interleukin (IL)-23 signals and is reversed by transient depletion of the skin microbiota. Mechanistically, CD109 restrains γδ17 cell activation in a cell-extrinsic manner by fortifying skin barrier integrity. Collectively, our data provide insight into the regulation of the skin IL-23/IL-17 immune axis and how homeostasis is maintained at this important barrier site.

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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207