The paper is already deleted from nature’s website. I also found a review article from 2019 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2018.10.013) talking about SLAMF6 in disease that doesn’t link it only to AML. So maybe read with caution
Not sure what’s up with Nature’s website on your end, but here’s the link that’s working for me to access the paper, which was published today (10-3-25): https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s43018-025-01054-6
Nonetheless, a paper from 6 years ago studying a receptor found on almost half of immune cells should have more current information available by now, if not already. In science, we build on the shoulders of giants and try to expand on the knowledge they helped us understand. Additionally, the older study examines SLAMF6’s function across health and disease, so it’s much more generalized. The new study aims to provide additional context for the earlier findings and focuses on acute myeloid leukemia in particular. I have a PhD in immunology, and it’s astonishing how little we actually understand about the subject. All in all, we understand the ocean better than the immune system, even though there’s more we don’t know about the ocean than we do. Even crazier is that most of our current understanding in immunology is actually for a rat’s immune system and not humans! But you’re not wrong to be cautious, all research papers should be read with a healthy amount of scrutiny. A wise man told me in undergrad that half of what we’d cover in the course would be incorrect, we just don’t know which half.
I stopped at the abstract with humanized mouse models.
