Evolution of gene expression changes in newborn rats after mechanical ventilation with reversible intubation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mechanical ventilation (MV) is life-saving but potentially harmful for lungs of premature infants. So far, animal models dealt with the acute impact of MV on immature lungs, but less with its delayed effects. We used a newborn rodent model including non-surgical and therefore reversible intubation with moderate ventilation and hypothesized that there might be distinct gene expression patterns after a ventilation-free recovery period compared to acute effects directly after MV. Newborn rat pups were subjected to 8 hr of MV with 60% oxygen (O(2)), 24 hr after injection of lipopolysaccharide (LPS), intended to create a low inflammatory background as often recognized in preterm infants. Animals were separated in controls (CTRL), LPS injection (LPS), or full intervention with LPS and MV with 60% O(2) (LPS + MV + O(2)). Lungs were recovered either directly following (T:0 hr) or 48 hr after MV (T:48 hr). Histologically, signs of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) were observed in LPS + MV + O(2) lungs at T:0 hr, while changes appeared similar to those known from patients with chronic lung disease (CLD) with fewer albeit larger gas exchange units, at T:48 hr. At T:0 hr, LPS + MV + O(2) increased gene expression of pro-inflammatory MIP-2. In parallel anti-inflammatory IL-1Ra gene expression was increased in LPS and LPS + MV + O(2) groups. At T:48 hr, pro- and anti-inflammatory genes had returned to their basal expression. MMP-2 gene expression was decreased in LPS and LPS + MV + O(2) groups at T:0 hr, but no longer at T:48 hr. MMP-9 gene expression levels were unchanged directly after MV. However, at T:48 hr, gene and protein expression increased in LPS + MV + O(2) group. In conclusion, this study demonstrates the feasibility of delayed outcome measurements after a ventilation-free period in newborn rats and may help to further understand the time-course of molecular changes following MV. The differences obtained from the two time points could be interpreted as an initial transitory increase of inflammation and a delayed impact of the intervention on structure-related genes.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".