MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225136238 · doi:10.1042/bst20211203

Transgenic mouse models to study the physiological and pathophysiological roles of human Siglecs

2022· article· en· W4225136238 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Society Transactions · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGenetically modified mouseTransgeneImmune systemIn vivoSialic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectins (Siglecs) are important immunomodulatory receptors. Due to differences between human and mouse Siglecs, defining the in vivo roles for human Siglecs (hSiglecs) can be challenging. One solution is the development and use of hSiglec transgenic mice to assess the physiological roles of hSiglecs in health and disease. These transgenic mice can also serve as important models for the pre-clinical testing of immunomodulatory approaches that are based on targeting hSiglecs. Four general methods have been used to create hSiglec-expressing transgenic mice, each with associated advantages and disadvantages. To date, transgenic mouse models expressing hSiglec-2 (CD22), -3 (CD33), -7, -8, -9, -11, and -16 have been created. This review focuses on both the generation of these hSiglec transgenic mice, along with the important findings that have been made through their study. Cumulatively, hSiglec transgenic mouse models are providing a deeper understanding of the differences between human and mice orthologs/paralogs, mechanisms by which Siglecs regulate immune cell signaling, physiological roles of Siglecs in disease, and different paradigms where targeting Siglecs may be therapeutically advantageous.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical Society TransactionsSame topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207