Overexpression of elastin fragments in infarcted myocardium attenuates scar expansion and heart dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ventricular dilation after myocardial infarction can cause heart failure. Increasing strength and elasticity in the infarct region might prevent ventricular dilation. Because elastin provides strength, extensibility, and resilience to tissues and maintains tissue architecture, we studied the effect of elastin expression in the infarct on scar expansion and heart function. COS-7 cells transfected with a plasmid with an elastin gene fragment or a vector were seeded into a Gelfoam mesh and cultured. Mechanical stretch test (n = 5/group) showed that the elastin mesh was more elastic (P < 0.05) and tensile (P < 0.05) than the vector mesh. In an in vivo study in rats, 6 days after left anterior descending coronary artery ligation, COS-7 cells (Cell group, n = 7) or COS-7 cells with elastin gene (Elastin group, n = 9) or vector (Vector group, n = 9) were transplanted into the infarct; infarcted rats served as controls (n = 7). Over 8 wk the Cell group did not demonstrate effects on scar expansion and deterioration of heart function vs. controls. In contrast, infarct expansion was smaller and heart function was better maintained in the Elastin group vs. the Vector group (P < 0.05). At 8 wk after cell transplantation Langendorff data showed that the Elastin group had greater (P < 0.01) developed pressure and a smaller left ventricular volume than the Vector group. Western blot and histology showed accumulated elastin in the Elastin group infarct. Changing the extracellular matrix composition of a myocardial infarct by increasing elastin fragment content attenuated scar expansion, ventricular dilation, and onset of heart dysfunction.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".