MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Zinc, copper and manganese enhanced keratinocyte migration through a functional modulation of keratinocyte integrins

2000· article· en· W2078878250 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Tenaud, Sabine Léroy, Nathalie Chebassier, Brigitte Dréno

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Dermatology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
FundersColoplast
KeywordsKeratinocyteIntegrinHaCaTChemistryCell biologyZincBiochemistryBiologyReceptorIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The migration of keratinocytes plays an important role in the re-epithelialization of cutaneous wounds. Zinc, copper and manganese are used in vivo for their healing properties and their mechanism of action is still only partially known. Thus, they have been shown both to promote keratinocyte proliferation and to modulate integrins expression. The aim of this study was to determine if trace elements induce an increase of the migration of keratinocytes and if this effect is related to the modulation of integrins. Two independent migration assays were used to study keratinocyte migration: the scratch assay using normal human keratinocytes and the modified Boyden chamber using HaCaT cells. Inhibition studies using function-blocking antibodies directed to alpha3, alpha6, alpha(v) and beta1 subunits were performed to investigate the modulator effect of trace elements on integrin function. In this way, zinc and copper gluconates increased alpha3, alpha(v) and beta1 function whereas manganese gluconate seems mainly able to modulate the function of alpha3 and beta1. The stimulating effect of these trace elements on keratinocyte migration does not appear related to alpha6 subunit. Thus, zinc, copper and manganese enhanced keratinocyte migration and one of the mechanisms was going through a modulation of integrin functions.

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 score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental DermatologySame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207