MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963904462 · doi:10.1089/ten.tea.2009.0504

A Collagen–Chitosan Hydrogel for Endothelial Differentiation and Angiogenesis

2010· article· en· W1963904462 on OpenAlexafffund
Chao Deng, Pingchuan Zhang, Branka Vulesevic, Drew Kuraitis, Fengfu Li, Ann Fook Yang, May Griffith, Marc Ruel, Erik J. Suuronen

Bibliographic record

VenueTissue Engineering Part A · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsAngiogenesisCD31ChemistryChitosanProgenitor cellSelf-healing hydrogelsMatrix (chemical analysis)Tissue engineeringEndothelial stem cellNeovascularizationCell biologyExtracellular matrixEndothelial progenitor cellImmunologyBiomedical engineeringStem cellCancer researchIn vitroMedicineBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell therapy for the treatment of cardiovascular disease has been hindered by low cell engraftment, poor survival, and inadequate phenotype and function. In this study, we added chitosan to a previously developed injectable collagen matrix, with the aim of improving its properties for cell therapy and neovascularization. Different ratios of collagen and chitosan were mixed and chemically crosslinked to produce hydrogels. Swell and degradation assays showed that chitosan improved the stability of the collagen hydrogel. In culture, endothelial cells formed significantly more vascular-like structures on collagen–chitosan than collagen-only matrix. While the differentiation of circulating progenitor cells to CD31+ cells was equal on all matrices, vascular endothelial-cadherin expression was increased on the collagen–chitosan matrix, suggesting greater maturation of the endothelial cells. In addition, the collagen–chitosan matrix supported a significantly greater number of CD133+ progenitor cells than the collagen-only matrix. In vivo, subcutaneously implanted collagen–chitosan matrices stimulated greater vascular growth and recruited more von Willebrand factor (vWF+) and CXCR4+ endothelial/angiogenic cells than the collagen-only matrix. These results indicate that the addition of chitosan can improve the physical properties of collagen matrices, and enhance their ability to support endothelial cells and angiogenesis for use in cardiovascular tissue engineering applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations165
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTissue Engineering Part ASame topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207