MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CNS Progenitor Cells Promote a Permissive Environment for Neurite Outgrowth via a Matrix Metalloproteinase-2-Dependent Mechanism

2007· article· en· W1965842265 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yiqin Zhang, Henry Klassen, Budd A. Tucker, Maria-Thereza R. Perez, Michael J. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Public Health ServiceU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsNeuriteProgenitor cellCell biologyBiologyTransplantationRetinaMMP2ProgenitorNeuroscienceStem cellDownregulation and upregulationMedicineInternal medicineIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transplantation of progenitor cells to the CNS has shown promise in neuronal and glial replacement and as a means of rescuing host neurons from apoptosis. Here we examined the effect of progenitor grafts on neurite extension in the degenerating retina of rd1 (retinal degeneration 1) mice. Transplantation of retinal progenitor cells induced increased matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP2) secretion, partly from activated glial cells, which was then activated by neuronally expressed MMP14. Active MMP2 resulted in proteolysis of the neurite outgrowth inhibitors CD44 and neurocan in the degenerative retina, allowing significantly increased neurite outgrowth across the border between abutting nondystrophic and rd1 retinas. Progenitor-induced enhancement of outgrowth was abrogated by an MMP inhibitor or by coculture with retinal explants from MMP2-/- mice. This study provides the first identification of an MMP2-dependent mechanism by which exogenous progenitor cells alter the host environment to promote neural regeneration. This suggests a novel therapeutic role for progenitor cells in the treatment of CNS degenerative diseases.

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 score0.003

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations115
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207