Redirecting antigen specificity to nonspecific CD8+25+ regular T cells through antigen-specific peptide/MHC complex arming. (P1085)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Compared with CD4+25+ regulatory T (Tr) cells, the mechanisms for immune suppression of natural CD8+25+ Tr cells are less studied. In this study, we demonstrate that CD8+25+ Tr cells inhibit in vitro T cell proliferation via cell-contact fashion, but independent upon expression of suppressive IL-10, TGF-β and CTLA-4. CD8+25+ Tr-treated T cells express CD73 and FR-4 and become resistant to cell proliferation by dendritic cell (DC) stimulation, whereas CD8+25+ Tr-treated DCs down-regulate expression of DC-maturation markers and inflammatory cytokines, and lack stimulatory effect on T cell proliferation. CD8+25+ Tr cells suppress ovalbumin (OVA)-pulsed DC (DCOVA)-stimulated CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) responses and antitumor immunity as well as myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) peptide-induced experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE). Importantly, CD8+25+ Tr cells, when pulsed with OVA323-339 and MOG35-55 peptide, exert enhanced inhibition of antitumor immunity and EAE, respectively. Interestingly, OVA323-339-pulsed (armed) CD8+25+ Tr cells also reduce CD4+ T cell interactions with DCOVA via increasing CD4+ T-cell velocities assessed by two-photon microscopy. Therefore, redirecting antigen specificity to nonspecific CD8+25+ Tr cells for enhanced immune suppression can be achieved via antigen-specific peptide/MHC complex arming. This principle may have great impact in natural Tr cell-mediated immunotherapy for autoimmune diseases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".