MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7038221486

Identificaiton and characterization of the antitumor suppressor activity of interferon regulatory factor 3 (IRF-3) in B16 melanoma tumor model

2003· dissertation· en· W7038221486 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2003
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
Topicinterferon and immune responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunogenicityMelanomaCytokineImmunotherapyImmune systemInterferonSuppressorCancer immunotherapyEpitope
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delivery of transcription factor to cancer cells to reprogram gene expression may represent a novel strategy to augment the production of immune stimulatory cytokines and trigger a more potent antitumor response. In this study, we used a syngeneic mouse tumor model system involving the poorly immunogenic murine B16 tumor to evaluate whether delivery of the interferon regulatory factor 3 (IRF-3) can be used as an immunomodulator. The low immunogenicity of B16 melanoma cells may be due to their deficient cytokine expression, as well as their inefficient MHC-restricted epitope presentation. Gene-modified B16 melanoma cells were selected for their ability to express and to activate the IRF-3 protein. When injected into C57BL/6 mice, tumor growth was inhibited and tumors that developed from these mice had significant infiltration of inflammatory cells. Our observations demonstrated that gene transfer of IRF-3 into B16 melanoma could mediate important antitumor response by restoring both the deficient cytokine profile and the MHC class I protein expression.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicinterferon and immune responsesFrench-language works237,207