<i>HOXA4</i> Provides Stronger Engraftment Potential to Short-Term Repopulating Cells Than <i>HOXB4</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genes of the HOX4 paralog group have been shown to expand hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). Endogenous expression of HOXA4 is 10-fold higher than HOXB4 in embryonic primitive hematopoietic cells undergoing self-renewal suggesting a more potent capacity of HOXA4 to expand HSC. In this study, we provide evidence by direct competitive bone marrow cultures that HOXA4 and HOXB4 induce self-renewal of primitive hematopoietic cells with identical kinetics. Transplantation assays show that short-term repopulation by HOXA4-overexpressing multilineage progenitors was significantly greater than HOXB4-overexpressing progenitors in vivo, indicating differences in the sensitivity of the cells to external signals. Small array gene expression analysis showed an increase in multiple Notch and Wnt signaling -associated genes, including receptors and ligands, as well as pluripotency genes, for both HOXA4- and HOXB4-overexpressing cells, which was more pronounced for HOXA4, suggesting that both HOX proteins may assert their affects through intrinsic and extrinsic pathways to induce self-renewal of primitive hematopoietic cells. Thus, HOXA4 increases short-term repopulation to higher levels than HOXB4, which may involve Notch signaling.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".