Lung capillary injury and repair in left heart disease: a new target for therapy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lungs are the primary organs affected in LHD (left heart disease). Increased left atrial pressure leads to pulmonary alveolar-capillary stress failure, resulting in cycles of alveolar wall injury and repair. The reparative process causes the proliferation of MYFs (myofibroblasts) with fibrosis and extracellular matrix deposition, resulting in thickening of the alveolar wall. Although the resultant reduction in vascular permeability is initially protective against pulmonary oedema, the process becomes maladaptive causing a restrictive lung syndrome with impaired gas exchange. This pathological process may also contribute to PH (pulmonary hypertension) due to LHD. Few clinical trials have specifically evaluated lung structural remodelling and the effect of related therapies in LHD. Currently approved treatment for chronic HF (heart failure) may have direct beneficial effects on lung structural remodelling. In the future, novel therapies specifically targeting the remodelling processes may potentially be utilized. In the present review, we summarize data supporting the clinical importance and pathophysiological mechanisms of lung structural remodelling in LHD and propose that this pathophysiological process should be explored further in pre-clinical studies and future therapeutic trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
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".