Aging does not Enhance Experimental Cigarette Smoke-Induced COPD in the Mouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been proposed that the development of COPD is driven by premature aging/premature senescence of lung parenchyma cells. There are data suggesting that old mice develop a greater inflammatory and lower anti-oxidant response after cigarette smoke compared to young mice, but whether these differences actually translate into greater levels of disease is unknown. We exposed C57Bl/6 female mice to daily cigarette smoke for 6 months starting at age 3 months (Ayoung@) or age 12 months (Aold@), with air-exposed controls. There were no differences in measures of airspace size between the two control groups and cigarette smoke induced exactly the same amount of emphysema in young and old. The severity of smoke-induced small airway remodeling using various measures was identical in both groups. Smoke increased numbers of tissue macrophages and neutrophils and levels of 8-hydroxyguanosine, a marker of oxidant damage, but there were no differences between young and old. Gene expression studies using laser capture microdissected airways and parenchyma overall showed a trend to lower levels in older animals and a somewhat lesser response to cigarette smoke in both airways and parenchyma but the differences were usually not marked. Telomere length was greatest in young control mice and was decreased by both smoking and age. The senescence marker p21(Waf1) was equally upregulated by smoke in young and old, but p16(INK4a), another senescence marker, was not upregulated at all. We conclude, in this model, animal age does not affect the development of emphysema and small airway remodeling.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".