In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".

Q: Paragraph: Objective: Tumor-treating fields are currently used to successfully treat various cancers; however, the specific pathways associated with its efficacy remain unknown in the immune responses. Here, we evaluated tumor-treating fields-mediated initiation of the macrophage-specific immune response. Materials and Methods: We subjected RAW 264.7 mouse macrophages to clinically relevant levels of tumor-treating fields (0.9 V/cm, 150 kHz) and evaluated alterations in cytokine expression and release, as well as cell viability. Additionally, we investigated the status of immunomodulatory pathways to determine their roles in tumor-treating fields-mediated immune activation. Results and Discussion: Our results indicated that tumor-treating fields treatment at 0.9 V/cm decreased cell viability and increased cytokine messenger RNA/protein levels, as well as levels of nitric oxide and reactive oxygen species, relative to controls. The levels of tumor necrosis factor a, interleukin 1b, and interleukin 6 were markedly increased in tumor-treating fields-treated RAW 264.7 cells cocultured with 4T1 murine mammary carcinoma cells compared with those in 4T1 or RAW 264.7 cells with or without tumor-treating fields treatment. Moreover, the viability of 4T1 cells treated with the conditioned medium of tumor-treating fields-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells decreased, indicating that macrophage activation by tumor-treating fields effectively killed the tumor cells. Moreover, tumor-treating fields treatment activated the nuclear factor kB and mitogen-activated protein kinase pathways involved in immunomodulatory signaling. Conclusion: These results provide critical insights into the mechanisms through which tumor-treating fields affect macrophagespecific immune responses and the efficacy of this method for cancer treatment. 
 Title: Tumor-Treating Fields Induce RAW264.7 Macrophage Activation Via NK-kB/MAPK Signaling Pathways

A: True
****
Q: Paragraph: Background: Melanoma differentiation associated gene 5 (MDA5) and retinoic acid-inducible gene-I (RIG-I) selectively sense cytoplasmic viral RNA to induce an antiviral immune response. Infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) is one of the most important infectious agents in chickens, and in chicken cells, it can be recognized by MDA5 to activate interferon production. RIG-I is considered to be absent in chickens. However, the absence of RIG-I in chickens raises the question of whether this protein influences the antiviral immune response against IBV infection. Here, we showed that chicken cells transfected with domestic goose RIG-I (dgRIG-I) exhibited increased IFN-β activity after IBV infection. We also found that IBV can cleave MAVS, an adaptor protein downstream of RIG-I and MDA5 that acts as a platform for antiviral innate immunity at an early stage of infection. Conclusions: Although chicken MDA5 (chMDA5) is functionally active during IBV infection, the absence of RIG-I may increase the susceptibility of chickens to IBV infection, and IBV may disrupt the activation of the host antiviral response through the cleavage of MAVS. 
 Title: Avian infectious bronchitis virus disrupts the melanoma differentiation associated gene 5 (MDA5) signaling pathway by cleavage of the adaptor protein MAVS

A: False
****
Q: Paragraph: A pattern in which nucleotide transitions are favored several fold over transversions is common in molecular evolution. When this pattern occurs among amino acid replacements, explanations often invoke an effect of selection, on the grounds that transitions are more conservative in their effects on proteins. However, the underlying hypothesis of conservative transitions has never been tested directly. Here we assess support for this hypothesis using direct evidence: the fitness effects of mutations in actual proteins measured via individual or paired growth experiments. We assembled data from 8 published studies, ranging in size from 24 to 757 single-nucleotide mutations that change an amino acid. Every study has the statistical power to reveal significant effects of amino acid exchangeability, and most studies have the power to discern a binary conservative-vs-radical distinction. However, only one study suggests that transitions are significantly more conservative than transversions. In the combined set of 1,239 replacements (544 transitions, 695 transversions), the chance that a transition is more conservative than a transversion is 53 % (95 % confidence interval 50 to 56) compared with the null expectation of 50 %. We show that this effect is not large compared with that of most biochemical factors, and is not large enough to explain the several-fold bias observed in evolution. In short, the available data have the power to verify the "conservative transitions" hypothesis if true, but suggest instead that selection on proteins plays at best a minor role in the observed bias. 
 Title: Article Fast Track On the Causes of Evolutionary Transition:Transversion Bias

A:
True
****