MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389943924 · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-44297-6

Antigen recognition reinforces regulatory T cell mediated Leishmania major persistence

2023· article· en· W4389943924 on OpenAlexafffund
Romaniya Zayats, Zhirong Mou, Atta Yazdanpanah, Gaurav Gupta, Paul Lopez, Deesha Nayar, Wan Hon Koh, Jude E. Uzonna, Thomas T. Murooka

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of CanadaUniversity of ManitobaResearch Manitoba
KeywordsLeishmania majorBiologyLeishmaniaEffectorImmunologyCutaneous leishmaniasisAntigenT cellTransgeneImmune systemLeishmaniasisCell biologyParasite hostingGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cutaneous Leishmania major infection elicits a rapid T cell response that is insufficient to clear residually infected cells, possibly due to the accumulation of regulatory T cells in healed skin. Here, we used Leishmania-specific TCR transgenic mice as a sensitive tool to characterize parasite-specific effector and immunosuppressive responses in vivo using two-photon microscopy. We show that Leishmania-specific Tregs displayed higher suppressive activity compared to polyclonal Tregs, that was mediated through IL-10 and not through disrupting cell-cell contacts or antigen presentation. In vivo expansion of endogenous Leishmania-specific Tregs resulted in disease reactivation that was also IL-10 dependent. Interestingly, lack of Treg expansion that recognized the immunodominant Leishmania peptide PEPCK was sufficient to restore robust effector Th1 responses and resulted in parasite control exclusively in male hosts. Our data suggest a stochastic model of Leishmania major persistence in skin, where cellular factors that control parasite numbers are counterbalanced by Leishmania-specific Tregs that facilitate parasite persistence.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.328
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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicResearch on Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207