Cellular therapy promotes endogenous stem cell repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular transplantation for cardiac repair has emerged as an exciting treatment option for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) and heart failure. Animal models of post-infarction left ventricular remodeling have demonstrated an improvement in left ventricular (LV) function, decrease in scar size, and amelioration of adverse cardiac remodeling after stem cell transplantation. These beneficial effects occur despite minimal engraftment and negligible differentiation of transplanted cells. Evidence of the heart capability to self-renew continues to mount; however, the extent to which this occurs is still unclear. Although there is a specific population of cardiac stem cells capable of differentiating into cardiomyocytes, they alone are not capable of fully regenerating tissue damaged by MI. Therefore, paracrine mechanisms may be responsible for activating endogenous stem cells to promote regeneration and prevent apoptosis. These structural beneficial effects may reduce regional wall stresses, consequently leading to long-term host myocardium gene/protein expression changes, which may subsequently result in improvement in LV function.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".