MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391784430 · doi:10.3389/frtra.2024.1350546

Immunogenicity and tolerance induction in vascularized composite allotransplantation

2024· article· en· W4391784430 on OpenAlexaff
Jiahui Sun, Aisha Adil, Felor Biniazan, Siba Haykal

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Transplantation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation Research
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunogenicityMedicineImmune systemPopulationImmunologyImmune toleranceAntigenTransplantationAllotransplantationCancer researchSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) is the transplantation of multiple tissues such as skin, muscle, bone, nerve, and vessels, as a functional unit (i.e., hand or face) to patients suffering from major tissue trauma and functional deficits. Though the surgical feasibility has been optimized, issues regarding graft rejection remains. VCA rejection involves a diverse population of cells but is primarily driven by both donor and recipient lymphocytes, antigen-presenting cells, macrophages, and other immune as well as donor-derived cells. In addition, it is commonly understood that different tissues within VCA, such as the skin, elicits a stronger rejection response. Currently, VCA recipients are required to follow potent and lifelong immunosuppressing regimens to maximize graft survival. This puts patients at risk for malignancies, opportunistic infections, and cancers, thereby posing a need for less perilous methods of inducing graft tolerance. This review will provide an overview of cell populations and mechanisms, specific tissue involved in VCA rejection, as well as an updated scope of current methods of tolerance induction.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in TransplantationSame topicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation ResearchFrench-language works237,207