MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986308541 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1601884

Two Strikes and You’re Out? The Pathogenic Interplay of Coinhibitor Deficiency and Lymphopenia-Induced Proliferation

2017· review· en· W2986308541 on OpenAlexaff
Kristofor K. Ellestad, Colin C. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoimmunityImmunologyT-cell receptorBiologyImmunotherapyDiseaseImmune systemT cellMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lymphopenia-induced proliferation (LIP) occurs when resources for T cell survival in a host are in excess. LIP has been associated with the development of inflammatory disease in situations where an additional disease-predisposing cofactor is present during LIP. This has led to the view of LIP-driven autoimmunity as a two hit model; however, not all cofactors have equal ability to precipitate autoimmunity and we have recently shown that in some circumstances, such as the absence of the coinhibitory molecule PD-1, additional hits are required. Herein we review factors controlling LIP, including coinhibitory molecules and other attenuators of TCR signaling, with a focus on their contribution to LIP-driven autoimmunity. Rather than viewing LIP-associated autoimmunity as an n-hit model, we suggest a more quantitative view of lymphopenia with respect to the factors that promote LIP as a tool to predict autoimmune potential and to inform tumor immunotherapy approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207