MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The mast cell stabilizer ketotifen prevents development of excessive skin wound contraction and fibrosis in red Duroc pigs

2008· article· en· W2070167505 on OpenAlexafffund
Corrie L. Gallant‐Behm, Kevin A. Hildebrand, David A. Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueWound Repair and Regeneration · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitute of Gender and HealthNational Institutes of HealthCalgary Foundation
KeywordsKetotifenContraction (grammar)Wound healingMedicineScarsFibrosisMast cellPharmacologySurgeryPathologyInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skin wound healing in Yorkshire pigs closely approximates human wound healing. Conversely, red Duroc pigs form fibroproliferative, hypercontractile scars. As mast cells have been implicated in several fibrotic conditions, the present study used these models to evaluate the potential role of mast cells in wound contraction and fibrosis. Immediately following the creation of full-thickness excisional wounds, the mast cell stabilizer ketotifen was used to treat both Yorkshire and red Durocs. Control red Durocs showed significantly more wound contraction than Yorkshires, both before and after reepithelialization. Ketotifen treatment significantly reduced the first phase of contraction in red Duroc wounds to a level equivalent to Yorkshire wounds, but had no detectable effect on the postepithelialization phase of contraction. Cessation of drug treatment after 10 weeks did not lead to resumption of excessive contraction in red Durocs, indicating that ketotifen blocked rather than delayed such contraction during a critical phase of healing. Ketotifen treatment also reduced the deposition of collagen within the red Duroc wounds, but did not affect Yorkshire wound contraction or collagen deposition. These results suggest that ketotifen may be an effective treatment for the reduction of excessive wound contraction and fibrosis in human cutaneous injuries, without affecting the normal healing process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWound Repair and RegenerationSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207