MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319318454 · doi:10.3390/ijms24033029

How the Innate Immune DNA Sensing cGAS-STING Pathway Is Involved in Apoptosis

2023· review· en· W4319318454 on OpenAlexaff
Wanglong Zheng, Anjing Liu, Nengwen Xia, Nanhua Chen, François Meurens, Jianzhong Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
Topicinterferon and immune responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectPriority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education InstitutionsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsInnate immune systemIRF3StingCell biologyApoptosisBiologySignal transductionStimulator of interferon genesCaspaseImmune systemImmunologyProgrammed cell deathGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cGAS-STING signaling axis can be activated by cytosolic DNA, including both non-self DNA and self DNA. This axis is used by the innate immune system to monitor invading pathogens and/or damage. Increasing evidence has suggested that the cGAS-STING pathway not only facilitates inflammatory responses and the production of type I interferons (IFN), but also activates other cellular processes, such as apoptosis. Recently, many studies have focused on analyzing the mechanisms of apoptosis induced by the cGAS-STING pathway and their consequences. This review gives a detailed account of the interplay between the cGAS-STING pathway and apoptosis. The cGAS-STING pathway can induce apoptosis through ER stress, NLRP3, NF-κB, IRF3, and IFN signals. Conversely, apoptosis can feed back to regulate the cGAS-STING pathway, suppressing it via the activation of caspases or promoting it via mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) release. Apoptosis mediated by the cGAS-STING pathway plays crucial roles in balancing innate immune responses, resisting infections, and limiting tumor growth.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations79
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicinterferon and immune responsesFrench-language works237,207