MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205240397 · doi:10.3410/f.2712967.2376067

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Integrin alphaIIbbeta3 activation in Chinese hamster ovary cells and platelets increases clustering rather than affinity.

2010· dataset· en· W4205240397 on OpenAlexaff
Myron I. Cybulsky, Sharon J. Hyduk

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2010
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCell Adhesion Molecules Research
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinese hamster ovary cellIntegrinPlateletCytoplasmCell biologyPlatelet activationChemistryHamsterBiologyMolecular biologyReceptorBiochemistryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrin alphaIIbbeta3 affinity regulation by talin binding to the cytoplasmic tail of beta3 is a generally accepted model for explaining activation of this integrin in Chinese hamster ovary cells and human platelets. Most of the evidence for this model comes from the use of multivalent ligands. This raises the possibility that the activation being measured is that of increased clustering of the integrin rather than affinity. Using a newly developed assay that probes integrins on the surface of cells with only monovalent ligands prior to fixation, I do not find increases in affinity of alphaIIbbeta3 integrins by talin head fragments in Chinese hamster ovary cells, nor do I observe affinity increases in human platelets stimulated with thrombin. Binding to a multivalent ligand does increase in both of these cases. This assay does report affinity increases induced by either Mn(2+), a cytoplasmic domain mutant (D723R) in the cytoplasmic domain of beta3, or preincubation with a peptide ligand. These results reconcile the previously observed differences between talin effects on integrin activation in Drosophila and vertebrate systems and suggest new models for talin regulation of integrin activity in human platelets. PMID: 19917607 Funding information This work was supported by: NIGMS NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01GM42474 NIGMS NIH HHS, United States Grant ID: R01 GM042474

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2870.137

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature→Same topicCell Adhesion Molecules Research→French-language works237,207→