Serum after Autologous Transplantation Stimulates Proliferation and Expansion of Human Hematopoietic Progenitor Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regeneration after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) depends on enormous activation of the stem cell pool. So far, it is hardly understood how these cells are recruited into proliferation and self-renewal. In this study, we have addressed the question if systemically released factors are involved in activation of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HPC) after autologous HSCT. Serum was taken from patients before chemotherapy, during neutropenia and after hematopoietic recovery. Subsequently, it was used as supplement for in vitro culture of CD34(+) cord blood HPC. Serum taken under hematopoietic stress (4 to 11 days after HSCT) significantly enhanced proliferation, maintained primitive immunophenotype (CD34(+), CD133(+), CD45(-)) for more cell divisions and increased colony forming units (CFU) as well as the number of cobblestone area-forming cells (CAFC). The stimulatory effect decays to normal levels after hematopoietic recovery (more than 2 weeks after HSCT). Chemokine profiling revealed a decline of several growth-factors during neutropenia, including platelet-derived growth factors PDGF-AA, PDGF-AB and PDGF-BB, whereas expression of monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1) increased. These results demonstrate that systemically released factors play an important role for stimulation of hematopoietic regeneration after autologous HSCT. This feedback mechanism opens new perspectives for in vivo stimulation of the stem cell pool.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".