Local Expression of Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) Protects Engraftment of Xenogeneic Skin Substitute in Rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have previously demonstrated that IDO expressed in fibroblasts causes bystander CD4+ T-cells as well as THP-1 cell damage by apoptosis. This finding let us to believe that local expression of IDO could potentially protect allogenic engraftment of a skin substitute. As T-cells are primarily responsible for graft rejection, here, we hypothesize that engraftment of IDO expressing xenogenic human fibroblasts populated in a collagen matrix can be immuno-protected in an animal model. Fibroblasts were infected by either Ad-GFP or Ad-GFP-IDO and free viral particles were removed by washing the cells after 36 hrs. The success of IDO gene expression by fibroblasts was then evaluated by measuring the level of kynurenine used as index for IDO enzyme activity. A skin substitute prepared from Collagen-GAG populated IDO expressing xenogenic fibroblasts was prepared and engrafted on the back of a rat model. The success of graft take was then examined by measuring the rate of wound closure, detection of IDO expressing xenogenic cells as well as the number of CD3+ infiltrated lymphocytes and capillary-like structures formed within the wound sites.
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".