CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 596PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling in cancerT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

PDK1 regulation of mTOR and hypoxia-inducible factor 1 integrate metabolism and migration of CD8+ T cells

Open access
Finlay, David K., Rosenzweig, Ella, Sinclair, Linda V., Feijoo-Carnero, Carmen, Hukelmann, Jens L., Rolf, Julia, Panteleyev, Andrey A., Okkenhaug, Klaus, Cantrell, Doreen A.·2012·Journal of Experimental Medicine
DOI 10.1084/jem.20112607PMC PMC3526360
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

mTORC1 (mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1) controls transcriptional programs that determine CD8+ cytolytic T cell (CTL) fate. In some cell systems, mTORC1 couples phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K) and Akt to the control of glucose uptake and glycolysis. However, PI3K–Akt-independent mechanisms control glucose metabolism in CD8+ T cells, and the role of mTORC1 has not been explored. The present study now demonstrates that mTORC1 activity in CD8+ T cells is not dependent on PI3K or Akt but is critical to sustain glucose uptake and glycolysis in CD8+ T cells. We also show that PI3K- and Akt-independent pathways mediated by mTORC1 regulate the expression of HIF1 (hypoxia-inducible factor 1) transcription factor complex. This mTORC1–HIF1 pathway is required to sustain glucose metabolism and glycolysis in effector CTLs and strikingly functions to couple mTORC1 to a diverse transcriptional program that controls expression of glucose transporters, multiple rate-limiting glycolytic enzymes, cytolytic effector molecules, and essential chemokine and adhesion receptors that regulate T cell trafficking. These data reveal a fundamental mechanism linking nutrient and oxygen sensing to transcriptional control of CD8+ T cell differentiation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1084/jem.20112607

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. mTORC1 regulates glucose uptake and glycolysis in TCR-stimulated CD8+ T cells. (A) Immunoblot analysis of Glut1 expression in naive OTI CD8+ T cells ± TCR (SIINFEKL) stimulation for 20 h. (B and C) Naive P14-LCMV CD8+ T cells ± TCR (gp33-41/anti-CD28) stimulation were assayed for glucose uptake (B) and lactate production (C). (D) Immunoblot analysis of naive OTI CD8+ T cells ± TCR (SIINFEKL) stimulation for 20 h. mTORC1 activity was determined by analyzing the phosphorylation of target sequences on S6K1 (T389 and S241/242) and phosphorylation of the S6K1 substrate S6 ribosomal protein. PTEN was used as a loading control. (E–G) Immunoblot analysis (E) and analysis of glucose uptake (F) and lactate production (G) for naive P14-LCMV CD8+ T cells ± TCR (gp33-41/anti-CD28) stimulation with or without rapamycin for 20 h. For all panels, data are mean ± SEM or representative of at least three experiments. All metabolic assays were preformed in triplicate (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons.
Figure 1. mTORC1 regulates glucose uptake and glycolysis in TCR-stimulated CD8+ T cells. (A) Immunoblot analysis of Glut1 expression in naive OTI CD8+ T cells ± TCR (SIINFEKL) stimulation for 20 h. (B and C) Naive P14-LCMV CD8+ T cells ± TCR (gp33-41/anti-CD28) stimulation were assayed for glucose uptake (B) and lactate production (C). (D) Immunoblot analysis of naive OTI CD8+ T cells ± TCR (SIINFEKL) stimulation for 20 h. mTORC1 activity was determined by analyzing the phosphorylation of target sequences on S6K1 (T389 and S241/242) and phosphorylation of the S6K1 substrate S6 ribosomal protein. PTEN was used as a loading control. (E–G) Immunoblot analysis (E) and analysis of glucose uptake (F) and lactate production (G) for naive P14-LCMV CD8+ T cells ± TCR (gp33-41/anti-CD28) stimulation with or without rapamycin for 20 h. For all panels, data are mean ± SEM or representative of at least three experiments. All metabolic assays were preformed in triplicate (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons.CC BY-NC-SA · PubMed Central
Figure 2. mTORC1 regulates glucose uptake and glycolysis in IL-2–maintained CTLs. (A) Immunoblot analysis for Glut1 expression in naive OTI CD8+ T cells ± TCR (SIINFEKL) stimulation for 20 h and also mature OTI CTLs. The black line indicates that intervening lanes have been spliced out. (B) Immunoblot analysis for Glut1 expression in CTLs treated with or without IL-2 for 20 h. 4EBP1 was used as a loading control. (C and D) Analysis of glucose uptake (C) and lactate production (D) in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with or without IL-2 for 20 h. (E and F) Analysis of lactate production (E) and glucose uptake (F) in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with or without rapamycin for 20 h. (G) Immunoblot analysis for Glut1 expression in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with or without rapamycin for 20 h. 4EBP1 was used as a loading control. (A–G) Data are mean ± SEM or representative of at least three experiments. All metabolic assays were preformed in triplicate (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. (H) SILAC-based proteomic analysis of P14-LCMV CTLs treated with and without rapamycin for 48 h. Shown is the relative expression of rate-limiting glycolytic enzymes (rapamycin/untreated). Data are mean ± SEM for three experiments and were analyzed by ANOVA (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). CD8α was used as a control protein with unchanged expression.
Figure 2. mTORC1 regulates glucose uptake and glycolysis in IL-2–maintained CTLs. (A) Immunoblot analysis for Glut1 expression in naive OTI CD8+ T cells ± TCR (SIINFEKL) stimulation for 20 h and also mature OTI CTLs. The black line indicates that intervening lanes have been spliced out. (B) Immunoblot analysis for Glut1 expression in CTLs treated with or without IL-2 for 20 h. 4EBP1 was used as a loading control. (C and D) Analysis of glucose uptake (C) and lactate production (D) in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with or without IL-2 for 20 h. (E and F) Analysis of lactate production (E) and glucose uptake (F) in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with or without rapamycin for 20 h. (G) Immunoblot analysis for Glut1 expression in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with or without rapamycin for 20 h. 4EBP1 was used as a loading control. (A–G) Data are mean ± SEM or representative of at least three experiments. All metabolic assays were preformed in triplicate (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. (H) SILAC-based proteomic analysis of P14-LCMV CTLs treated with and without rapamycin for 48 h. Shown is the relative expression of rate-limiting glycolytic enzymes (rapamycin/untreated). Data are mean ± SEM for three experiments and were analyzed by ANOVA (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). CD8α was used as a control protein with unchanged expression.CC BY-NC-SA · PubMed Central
Figure 3. mTORC1 controls glucose uptake and glycolysis via HIF1. (A–D) Immunoblot analysis of HIF1α and HIF1β expression in naive P14-LCMV CD8+ T cells ± TCR (gp33-41/anti-CD28) stimulation for 20 h (A and C) and P14-LCMV CTLs (A, B, and D) treated with and without IL-2 (B) or rapamycin (C and D) for 20 h. Phospho-S6K1 and phospho-S6 were used as a measure of mTORC1 activity. (E) Immunoblot analysis of c-myc expression in CTLs treated with or without rapamycin for 20 h. Phospho-S6K1 and phospho-S6 were used as a measure of mTORC1 activity. (F) Flow cytometric analysis of HIF1βWT/WT CD4Cre (WT) and HIF1βflox/flox CD4Cre (HIF1−/−) CD8+ T cells after TCR (2c11) stimulation for 20 h. (G) Immunoblot analysis of WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. (H and I) Analysis of glucose uptake (H) and lactate production (I) in WT and HIF1−/− naive CD8+ T cells after TCR (2c11/anti-CD28) stimulation for 20 h. Glucose uptake in unstimulated WT naive T cells is also shown (uptake in unstimulated HIF1−/− naive T cells is equivalent to WT; not depicted). (J–L) Analysis of glucose uptake (J), Glut1 expression (K), and lactate production (L) in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs. (M) A comparison of the transcriptional profile of HIF1 WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs was performed by microarray. Shown here are KEGG pathway analysis of genes down-regulated in HIF1−/− CTLs (top) and a heat map of the relative normalized expression of selected genes that are significantly different in expression in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs, as determined by microarray. For all panels, data are mean ± SEM or representative of at least three experiments. All metabolic assays were preformed in triplicate (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. Dotted lines indicate that intervening lanes have been spliced out.
Figure 3. mTORC1 controls glucose uptake and glycolysis via HIF1. (A–D) Immunoblot analysis of HIF1α and HIF1β expression in naive P14-LCMV CD8+ T cells ± TCR (gp33-41/anti-CD28) stimulation for 20 h (A and C) and P14-LCMV CTLs (A, B, and D) treated with and without IL-2 (B) or rapamycin (C and D) for 20 h. Phospho-S6K1 and phospho-S6 were used as a measure of mTORC1 activity. (E) Immunoblot analysis of c-myc expression in CTLs treated with or without rapamycin for 20 h. Phospho-S6K1 and phospho-S6 were used as a measure of mTORC1 activity. (F) Flow cytometric analysis of HIF1βWT/WT CD4Cre (WT) and HIF1βflox/flox CD4Cre (HIF1−/−) CD8+ T cells after TCR (2c11) stimulation for 20 h. (G) Immunoblot analysis of WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. (H and I) Analysis of glucose uptake (H) and lactate production (I) in WT and HIF1−/− naive CD8+ T cells after TCR (2c11/anti-CD28) stimulation for 20 h. Glucose uptake in unstimulated WT naive T cells is also shown (uptake in unstimulated HIF1−/− naive T cells is equivalent to WT; not depicted). (J–L) Analysis of glucose uptake (J), Glut1 expression (K), and lactate production (L) in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs. (M) A comparison of the transcriptional profile of HIF1 WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs was performed by microarray. Shown here are KEGG pathway analysis of genes down-regulated in HIF1−/− CTLs (top) and a heat map of the relative normalized expression of selected genes that are significantly different in expression in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs, as determined by microarray. For all panels, data are mean ± SEM or representative of at least three experiments. All metabolic assays were preformed in triplicate (**, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001). Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. Dotted lines indicate that intervening lanes have been spliced out.CC BY-NC-SA · PubMed Central
Figure 4. The HIF1 complex regulates the CD8+ T cell transcriptional program but is not essential for T cell proliferation. (A and B) Proliferation analysis of WT and HIF1−/− CTLs (A) and P14-LCMV CTLs treated with and without rapamycin (B). Cells were seeded at 0.3 × 106/ml, and CTL numbers were counted after 24 h. Data are mean ± SEM of five experiments. (C) Heat map showing the relative normalized expression of selected genes that are significantly different in expression in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs, as determined by microarray. (D) Real-time PCR analysis of IFN-γ expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. Data are mean ± SEM of three experiments in triplicate. (E) Immunoblot analysis of T-bet and Blimp1 expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. Data are representative of two experiments. (F) Real-time PCR analysis of Perforin mRNA expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. Data are mean ± SEM of three experiments in triplicate (**, P < 0.01). (G) Immunoblot analysis of Perforin protein expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs (top) and P14-LCMV CTLs treated ± rapamycin for 20 h (bottom). Data are representative of at least three experiments. (H) IL-2–maintained CTLs were placed in either hypoxic (1%) or normoxic (20%) oxygen for 24 h before being subjected to immunoblot analysis for HIF1α, Glut1, and perforin expression. Data are representative of three experiments. (I) ChIP was performed with anti–Pol II, and the changes in Pol II binding to the Perforin transcription start site and the second exon were quantified by real-time PCR. Data were normalized to input DNA amounts and plotted as fold over the values for Pol II binding to the HPRT proximal promoter. Data are mean ± SEM of three experiments performed in duplicate. (J) P14-LCMV T cells were activated for 2 d with gp33-41 and then cultured for a further 4 d with IL-2 in different glucose concentrations. Cells were then subjected to immunoblot analysis for perforin expression. Data are representative of two experiments. Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. Black lines (solid or dotted) indicate that intervening lanes have been spliced out.
Figure 4. The HIF1 complex regulates the CD8+ T cell transcriptional program but is not essential for T cell proliferation. (A and B) Proliferation analysis of WT and HIF1−/− CTLs (A) and P14-LCMV CTLs treated with and without rapamycin (B). Cells were seeded at 0.3 × 106/ml, and CTL numbers were counted after 24 h. Data are mean ± SEM of five experiments. (C) Heat map showing the relative normalized expression of selected genes that are significantly different in expression in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs, as determined by microarray. (D) Real-time PCR analysis of IFN-γ expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. Data are mean ± SEM of three experiments in triplicate. (E) Immunoblot analysis of T-bet and Blimp1 expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. Data are representative of two experiments. (F) Real-time PCR analysis of Perforin mRNA expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. Data are mean ± SEM of three experiments in triplicate (**, P < 0.01). (G) Immunoblot analysis of Perforin protein expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs (top) and P14-LCMV CTLs treated ± rapamycin for 20 h (bottom). Data are representative of at least three experiments. (H) IL-2–maintained CTLs were placed in either hypoxic (1%) or normoxic (20%) oxygen for 24 h before being subjected to immunoblot analysis for HIF1α, Glut1, and perforin expression. Data are representative of three experiments. (I) ChIP was performed with anti–Pol II, and the changes in Pol II binding to the Perforin transcription start site and the second exon were quantified by real-time PCR. Data were normalized to input DNA amounts and plotted as fold over the values for Pol II binding to the HPRT proximal promoter. Data are mean ± SEM of three experiments performed in duplicate. (J) P14-LCMV T cells were activated for 2 d with gp33-41 and then cultured for a further 4 d with IL-2 in different glucose concentrations. Cells were then subjected to immunoblot analysis for perforin expression. Data are representative of two experiments. Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. Black lines (solid or dotted) indicate that intervening lanes have been spliced out.CC BY-NC-SA · PubMed Central
Figure 5. HIF1 regulation of chemokines and chemokine receptors. (A) A comparison of the transcriptional profile of WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs was performed by microarray. Shown here are KEGG pathway analysis of genes up-regulated in HIF1−/− CTLs (top) and a heat map showing the relative normalized expression of selected genes that are significantly different in expression in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs, as determined by microarray. (B) Real-time PCR analysis of CD62L expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. (C) Analysis of CD62L surface expression on WT and HIF1−/− CTLs by flow cytometry. (D) Real-time PCR analysis of CCR7 expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. (E) WT and HIF1−/− CTLs were labeled with CFSE or CellTracker orange (CMTMR) and mixed at a ratio of 1:1 before being injected into C57BL/6 host mice. Values indicate recovery of WT or HIF1−/− cells as a percentage of the total recovered transferred cells from the blood and lymph nodes 4 h after transfer. Each dot indicates a mouse; horizontal bars indicate mean. (F) P14 T cells were activated for 2 d with cognate peptide and then cultured for a further 4 d with IL-2 in different glucose concentrations. Cells were then analyzed for the surface expression of CD62L by flow cytometry. In B and D, mean ± SEM of three experiments performed in triplicate is shown; in C and F, data are representative of at least three experiments (*, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01).
Figure 5. HIF1 regulation of chemokines and chemokine receptors. (A) A comparison of the transcriptional profile of WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs was performed by microarray. Shown here are KEGG pathway analysis of genes up-regulated in HIF1−/− CTLs (top) and a heat map showing the relative normalized expression of selected genes that are significantly different in expression in WT versus HIF1−/− CTLs, as determined by microarray. (B) Real-time PCR analysis of CD62L expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. (C) Analysis of CD62L surface expression on WT and HIF1−/− CTLs by flow cytometry. (D) Real-time PCR analysis of CCR7 expression in WT and HIF1−/− CTLs. (E) WT and HIF1−/− CTLs were labeled with CFSE or CellTracker orange (CMTMR) and mixed at a ratio of 1:1 before being injected into C57BL/6 host mice. Values indicate recovery of WT or HIF1−/− cells as a percentage of the total recovered transferred cells from the blood and lymph nodes 4 h after transfer. Each dot indicates a mouse; horizontal bars indicate mean. (F) P14 T cells were activated for 2 d with cognate peptide and then cultured for a further 4 d with IL-2 in different glucose concentrations. Cells were then analyzed for the surface expression of CD62L by flow cytometry. In B and D, mean ± SEM of three experiments performed in triplicate is shown; in C and F, data are representative of at least three experiments (*, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01).CC BY-NC-SA · PubMed Central
Figure 6. mTORC1 and HIF1 do not regulate Akt activity or Foxo phosphorylation. (A) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated AKT and Foxos in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with and without Akti1/2 or rapamycin for 24 h. (B) P14-LCMV CTLs were treated with and without rapamycin or Akti1/2 for 24 h and subjected to nuclear/cytoplasmic fractionation before immunoblot analysis for Foxo1 and Foxo3a expression. Purity of cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions was confirmed by IκBα and Smc1 expression. (C) Immunoblot analysis of WT or HIF1−/− CTLs for Akt–Foxo and mTORC1 signaling. HIF1−/− CTLs were treated with rapamycin as a negative control for mTORC1 activity. For all panels, data are representative of at least three experiments. Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. Dotted lines indicate that intervening lanes have been spliced out.
Figure 6. mTORC1 and HIF1 do not regulate Akt activity or Foxo phosphorylation. (A) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated AKT and Foxos in P14-LCMV CTLs treated with and without Akti1/2 or rapamycin for 24 h. (B) P14-LCMV CTLs were treated with and without rapamycin or Akti1/2 for 24 h and subjected to nuclear/cytoplasmic fractionation before immunoblot analysis for Foxo1 and Foxo3a expression. Purity of cytoplasmic and nuclear fractions was confirmed by IκBα and Smc1 expression. (C) Immunoblot analysis of WT or HIF1−/− CTLs for Akt–Foxo and mTORC1 signaling. HIF1−/− CTLs were treated with rapamycin as a negative control for mTORC1 activity. For all panels, data are representative of at least three experiments. Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons. Dotted lines indicate that intervening lanes have been spliced out.CC BY-NC-SA · PubMed Central
Figure 7. PI3K and Akt do not regulate mTORC1 activity. (A and B) CTLs were cultured in the presence or absence of Akti1/2, IC87114, rapamycin, or LY294002 for 60 min (A and B) or 24 h (A) and subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (C) CTLs generated from WT or p110δD910A mice were subjected to immunoblot analysis with or without rapamycin treatment (30 min). Data are representative of two experiments. (D) CTLs were cultured in the presence or absence of Akti1/2, IC87114, or rapamycin for 24 h and subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (E–G) CTLs generated from PDK1flox/flox TamoxCre (PDK1Flox) and PDK1WT/WT TamoxCre (WT) mice were treated ± 4′OHT for 3 d to delete PDK1 and subjected to immunoblot analysis. For, A, B, and D–G, data are representative of at least three experiments. Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons.
Figure 7. PI3K and Akt do not regulate mTORC1 activity. (A and B) CTLs were cultured in the presence or absence of Akti1/2, IC87114, rapamycin, or LY294002 for 60 min (A and B) or 24 h (A) and subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (C) CTLs generated from WT or p110δD910A mice were subjected to immunoblot analysis with or without rapamycin treatment (30 min). Data are representative of two experiments. (D) CTLs were cultured in the presence or absence of Akti1/2, IC87114, or rapamycin for 24 h and subjected to immunoblot analysis with the indicated antibodies. (E–G) CTLs generated from PDK1flox/flox TamoxCre (PDK1Flox) and PDK1WT/WT TamoxCre (WT) mice were treated ± 4′OHT for 3 d to delete PDK1 and subjected to immunoblot analysis. For, A, B, and D–G, data are representative of at least three experiments. Molecular mass is indicated in kilodaltons.CC BY-NC-SA · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Finlay, D. K., Rosenzweig, E., Sinclair, L. V., Feijoo-Carnero, C., Hukelmann, J. L., Rolf, J., Panteleyev, A. A., Okkenhaug, K., & Cantrell, D. A.
Affiliations
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • University of Dundee (GB)
  • Division of Cell Signalling and Immunology, College of Life Sciences 3 ; and 4
  • Babraham Institute (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Finlay, David K.
  • Cantrell, Doreen A.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Experimental Medicine
Publisher
Rockefeller University Press
Published
2012-11-26
Volume
209
Issue
13
Pages
2441-2453
ISSN
  • 0022-1007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-9538
DOI
10.1084/jem.20112607
PMC
PMC3526360
OpenAlex
W2164164239
Cited by
596
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 2
FWCI
14.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Experimental Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (acceptedVersion)
  • Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • University of Dundee
  • Wellcome Trust (097418/Z/11/Z, 095691, 065975, 097418)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling in cancer
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › T-cell and B-cell Immunology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Keywords
mTORC1, CD8+ T cells, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, HIF-1, glucose metabolism, glycolysis, glucose uptake, T cell migration, T cell differentiation, nutrient sensing, oxygen sensing, glucose transporters, chemokine receptors, cell adhesion receptors
MeSH terms
Mechanistic Target of Rapamycin Complex 1, Animals, Cell Differentiation, Cell Movement, Gene Expression Regulation, Glucose, Glycolysis, Interleukin-2, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Mice, Mutant Strains, Mice, Transgenic, Proteins, Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell, Protein Serine-Threonine Kinases, CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes, Chemokines, Receptors, Chemokine, Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases, Multiprotein Complexes, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt, Mice, Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Nuclear Translocator, Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1, Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1, alpha Subunit, TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases, 3-Phosphoinositide-Dependent Protein Kinases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review