MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987286460 · doi:10.1139/y2012-036

Platelet-associated angiogenesis regulating factors: a pharmacological perspective

2012· review· en· W1987286460 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Aneta Radziwon‐Balicka, Cesar Moncada de la Rosa, Paul Jurasz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Cancer Foundation
KeywordsAngiogenesisAngiostatinPlateletNeovascularizationCell biologyPlatelet activationHemostasisImmunologyPlatelet factor 4BiologyCancer researchPharmacologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Platelets, in addition to maintaining hemostasis, also stimulate angiogenesis by generating and releasing, upon activation, factors that promote the growth of new blood vessels. To date, at least 20 angiogenesis-regulating factors have been identified in platelets, including both promoters and inhibitors. Platelet-derived angiogenesis regulators promote angiogenesis during wound healing, tumor growth, and in response to ischemia. Within platelets, angiogenesis regulators are primarily stored in α-granules, but are also found in the cytosol or derived from membrane lipids. Their release can be inhibited pharmacologically by anti-platelet agents, which consequently suppress platelet-stimulated angiogenesis. Several years ago, our research group discovered that platelets generate the angiogenesis inhibitor angiostatin independent of the activation state of platelets, and that platelet-derived angiostatin serves to limit the angiogenesis-stimulating effects of platelets. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge of platelet-associated angiogenesis regulators, how they impact angiogenesis, and how they are controlled pharmacologically.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations47
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerFrench-language works237,207