MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367317907 · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2023.1190177

Who and how, DNA sensors in NETs-driven inflammation

2023· review· en· W4367317907 on OpenAlexafffund
Félix-Antoine Aubé, Amel Bidias, Geneviève Pépin

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Immunology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicNeutrophil, Myeloperoxidase and Oxidative Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsInflammationContext (archaeology)Cell biologyReceptorPattern recognition receptorDNABiologyTLR9Proinflammatory cytokineActivator (genetics)ImmunologyComputational biologyInnate immune systemGeneticsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During infections, neutrophil extracellular traps act like a meshwork of molecules that captures microbes. In contrast, during sterile inflammation the presence of NETs is usually associated with tissue damage and uncontrolled inflammation. In this context, DNA acts both as activator of NETs formation and immunogenic molecule fueling inflammation within the injured tissue microenvironment. Pattern recognition receptors that specifically bind to and get activated by DNA such as Toll-like receptor-9 (TLR9), cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS), Nod-like receptor protein 3 (NLRP3) and Absence in Melanoma-2 (AIM2) have been reported to play a role in NETs formation and detection. However, how these DNA sensors contribute to NETs-driven inflammation is not well understood. Whether these DNA sensors have unique roles or on the contrary they are mostly redundant is still elusive. In this review, we summarize the known contribution of the above DNA sensors to the formation and detection of NETs in the context of sterile inflammation. We also highlight scientific gaps needed to be addressed and propose future direction for therapeutic targets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in ImmunologySame topicNeutrophil, Myeloperoxidase and Oxidative MechanismsFrench-language works237,207