MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366742206 · doi:10.1093/cei/uxad048

Development and function of FOXP3+ regulators of immune responses

2023· article· en· W4366742206 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahdieh Golzari-Sorkheh, Juan Carlos Zúñiga‐Pflücker

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical & Experimental Immunology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFOXP3Immune systemBiologyContext (archaeology)Transcription factorEpigeneticsImmunologyCell biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Forkhead Box P3 (FOXP3) protein is an essential transcription factor for the development and function of regulatory T cells (Tregs), involved in the maintenance of immunological tolerance. Although extensive research over the last decade has investigated the critical role of FOXP3+ cells in preserving immune homeostasis, our understanding of their specific functions remains limited. Therefore, unveiling the molecular mechanisms underpinning the up- and downstream transcriptional regulation of and by FOXP3 is crucial for developing Treg-targeted therapeutics. Dysfunctions in FOXP3+ Tregs have also been found to be inherent drivers of autoimmune disorders and have been shown to exhibit multifaceted functions in the context of cancer. Recent research suggests that these cells may also be involved in tissue-specific repair and regeneration. Herein, we summarize current understanding of the thymic-transcriptional regulatory landscape of FOXP3+ Tregs, their epigenetic modulators, and associated signaling pathways. Finally, we highlight the contributions of FOXP3 on the functional development of Tregs and reflect on the clinical implications in the context of pathological and physiological immune responses.

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)0.001
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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical & Experimental ImmunologySame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207