MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Circular RNA AEBP2 modulates dendritic cells by the hnRNP/pP65 signaling pathway

2020· article· en· W4313373750 on OpenAlexaff
Qinfeng Zhou, Bowen Wang, James Koropatnick, Wei‐Ping Min, Vivian C. McAlister, Adam Greasley, Xiufen Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCircular RNAs in diseases
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGene knockdownCell biologyCD80RNABiologyHeterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteinCircular RNAMolecular biologyCD40ChemistryRibonucleoproteinIn vitroCytotoxic T cellGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Circular RNA (circRNA) has been the focus of research in recent years. However, circRNA is rarely reported in dendritic cells (DCs). In our study, Microarray analysis of circRNA showed that circular RNA AEBP2 (circAEBP2) is significantly up-regulated in mature DCs compared with immature DCs. Knockdown of circAEBP2 in DC with siRNA arrests DCs at immature status with lower expression of MHC class II, CD40, CD80, and CD83, as well as decreasing the expression of Phosphorylation of nuclear factor-kappa B p65. CircAEBP2 -silenced DCs failed to activate allogeneic CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells in vitro. RNA immunoprecipitation assays show heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins (hnRNP) are enriched by circAEBP2 probes which have complementary circAEBP2 sequence, indicating circAEBP2 interacts with hnRNP. The effect of circAEBP2 silenced DCs on induction of anti-tumor immunity is investigated in an ongoing murine melanoma model. In conclusion, our results demonstrate that circAEBP2 regulates the development and function of DCs through interacting the hnRNP/pP65 signaling pathway. CircAEBP2 will be a new potential target for DCs-based immunotherapy.

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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicCircular RNAs in diseasesFrench-language works237,207