MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206581142 · doi:10.1111/febs.16236

The glycocalyx and immune evasion in cancer

2021· article· en· W3206581142 on OpenAlexafffund
Sina Ghasempour, Spencer A. Freeman

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGlycocalyxImmune systemEvasion (ethics)GlycobiologyMyeloid cellsGlycoproteinBiologyMucinImmunologyCell biologyMyeloidTransmembrane proteinGlycanReceptorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to establish malignant lesions, tumors must first evade their detection by immune cells. Tumors achieve this by embellishing and tailoring their glycocalyx, a network of polysaccharides and glycosylated proteins that refracts the phagocytic efforts of myeloid cells, shrouds neoantigens and other ligands from cells of the acquired immune system, and skews immune responses. The barriers imposed by the glycocalyx are biophysical and also linked to the inhibitory receptor signaling pathways of immune cells that engage tumor sialic acids as markers of healthy "self". This would explain the pressure for cancers to upregulate the synthases, transmembrane mucins, and other heavily sialylated glycoproteins involved in establishing a repulsive glycocalyx. Accordingly, individual tumor cells that are best capable of constructing a shielding glycocalyx on their surface show higher metastatic potential in immunocompetent mice. Reciprocally, therapeutics have recently been devised to edit and dismantle the glycocalyx barrier in an effort to invigorate an immune response aimed at tumor destruction. We discuss the features of the tumor-associated glycocalyx that afford immune evasion of cancers and how strategies that target this barrier may potentiate antitumor immunity.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations47
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS JournalSame topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207