Pathogenesis of Neointima Formation Following Vascular Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revascularization remains the cornerstone of managing obstructive coronary artery disease. Although percutaneous coronary interventions involving the insertion of metal scaffolds, known as stents, has emerged as the preferred method of restoring vessel patency, as many as 30% of patients will experience a gradual re-narrowing of the lumen caused by neointima (NI) formation, resulting in a condition known as in-stent restenosis (ISR). ISR represents a significant limitation to percutaneous revascularization – however, abrogating NI formation following stent implantation has been hampered by an incomplete understanding of the pathogenesis of in-stent lesions. While numerous mechanisms have been proposed to explain the pathogenesis of ISR, data from human and animal models have yielded conflicting results. Herein, we review key studies of NI development following vascular injury with a focus on the origin of cells participating in NI formation. Keywords: In-stent restenosis, neointima, smooth muscle cell, endothelial cell, vascular progenitor cell, endothelial progenitor cell, drug-eluting stents, hyperplasia, contractile phenotype
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".