Expression and release of angiopoietin-1 from human neutrophils: Intracellular mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We recently demonstrated that Tie2 receptor activation on human neutrophils by both angiopoietins (Ang1 and Ang2) promoted platelet-activating factor synthesis, beta(2)-integrin activation, and cell migration. Herein, we wanted to assess if human neutrophils express angiopoietins and further delineate their mechanisms of release. Employing Reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction, Real time quantitative transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction, FACScan analysis and ELISA approaches, we observed that neutrophils express Ang1 but not Ang2. For each condition, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) detection was performed as positive control. Using nitrogen cavitation, we observed that Ang1 is localized in the cytosolic fraction whereas VEGF is found in beta-granules. Treatment of neutrophils with phorbol myristate acetate (PMA), N-Formyl-Met-Leu-Phe (fMLP) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) induced VEGF release. Maximal effect was observed with PMA (80 nM) stimulation inducing a complete release of VEGF content (565 +/- 100 pg/ml; 6 x 10(6) neutrophils), corresponding to a 18.9-fold increase as compared to phosphate buffer saline (PBS) treated neutrophils. By contrast, only a treatment with PMA (80 nM) induced Ang1 release. PMA treatment induced also a complete release of Ang1 (661 +/- 148 pg/ml; 6 x 10(6) neutrophils), corresponding to 2.8-fold increase as compared to PBS-treated neutrophils. In both cases, PMA-mediated release of VEGF and Ang1 was nearly maximal by 15 min. Finally, we observed that the induction of Ang1 release was calcium-independent whereas VEGF release was not. These data demonstrate the capacity of human neutrophils to synthesize Ang1, which is stored and released differently as compared to VEGF. These data suggest a different cascade of events regarding the distribution of selected growth factors during inflammation and angiogenesis.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".