Effects of Immobilization and Dynamic Compression on Intervertebral Disc Cell Gene Expression In Vivo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: An in vivo analysis of the intervertebral disc's cellular response to dynamic compression and immobilization was performed using a rat-tail model. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of immobilization and short-term dynamic compression on intervertebral disc cell expression of anabolic and catabolic genes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Static compressive loads applied in vivo alter the composition of the disc matrix and cell viability in a dose-dependent manner. The effects of in vivo dynamic compression, which is a more physiologic load, and reported risk factor for low back pain have not been investigated. METHODS: An Ilizarov-type device was implanted on the rat tail and used to determine the effects from 72 hours of immobilization (n = 6), 2 hours of dynamic compression (1 MPa/0.2 Hz) (n = 8), and the coupled effect of immobilization followed by compression (n = 8). Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction was used to measure changes in anabolic and catabolic gene levels relative to both internal control subjects and a sham-operated group (n = 7). RESULTS: Immobilization and dynamic compression affect anabolic and catabolic genes, with an overall downregulation of types 1 and 2 collagen and upregulation of aggrecanase, collagenase, and stromelysin in the anulus. The effects of immobilization and compression appear to be additive for collagen types 1 and 2 in the anulus, but not in the nucleus, and not for catabolic genes. CONCLUSIONS: Short-duration dynamic compression and immobilization alter gene expression in the rat disc. In studying the response of the disc to loading, it is necessary to look at both anabolic and catabolic pathways, and to consider strain history.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".