MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413917746 · doi:10.26508/lsa.202503249

γδ T cells are the prime antitumoral T cells in pediatric neuroblastoma

2025· article· en· W4413917746 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne M. Castenmiller, Anne L. Borst, Leyma Wardak, Jan J. Molenaar, Maria V. Papadopoulou, Ronald R. de Krijger, Alida F. van der Steeg, Max M. van Noesel, David Vermijlen, Rosa de Groot, Judith Wienke, Monika C. Wolkers

Bibliographic record

VenueLife Science Alliance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersStichting Sanquin BloedvoorzieningOncode InstituteStichting Kinderen Kankervrij
KeywordsNeuroblastomaCancer researchImmune systemImmunotherapyMedicineTumor-infiltrating lymphocytesT cellChemotherapyCD3ImmunologyBiologyCell cultureInternal medicineCD8

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-risk pediatric neuroblastoma patients have a dismal survival rate despite intensive treatment regimens. New treatment options are thus required. Even though HLA expression in neuroblastoma is low and immune cell infiltrates are limited, the presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) is indicative of better patient survival. Here, we show that most tumor lesions contain viable immune cell infiltrates after induction chemotherapy, with high percentages of CD3 + T cells. We therefore expanded the TILs and tested their antitumoral activity. With sufficient starting material, TIL expansion was as efficient as for adult solid tumors. However, whereas TIL products from adult tumors almost exclusively contained αβ T cells, in neuroblastoma-derived TIL products, γδ T cells expanded with similar efficacy as αβ T cells. Importantly, the antitumor responses in response to autologous tumor digest primarily originated from (Vδ1- and Vδ3-expressing) γδ T cells, and not from αβ T cells. In conclusion, this finding creates a window of opportunity for immunotherapy for neuroblastoma patients, with γδ T cells as potential prime responders.

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 score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLife Science AllianceSame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207