Local expression of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase suppresses T-cell-mediated rejection of an engineered bilayer skin substitute
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Engineered skin substitutes (ESSs) comprising both keratinocytes and fibroblasts can afford many advantages over the use of autologous keratinocyte grafts for the treatment of full-thickness and partial-thickness burns. In this study, we investigated the efficacy of a novel ESS containing both genetically altered fibroblasts that express the immunosuppressive factor indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) and primary keratinocytes from a nonautologous source to confer immune protection of xenogeneic cells cultured in a bilayer ESS. The results show that engraftment of IDO expressing skin substitutes on the back of rats significantly improves healing progression over 7 days compared with both nontreated and non-IDO-expressing skin substitutes (p<0.001). Immuno-staining of CD3 and CD31 suggests that IDO-expressing skin substitutes significantly suppress T cell infiltration (p<0.001) and improve neovascularization by four-fold (12.6±1.2 vs. 3.0±1.0 vessel-like structure/high power field), respectively. In conclusion, we found that IDO expression can improve the efficacy of nonautologous ESS for the purpose of wound healing by mitigating T-cell infiltration as well as promoting vascularization of the graft.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".