<scp>CEACAM1</scp> deficiency delays important wound healing processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cutaneous wound healing is a complex process that requires the coordination of many cell types to achieve proper tissue repair. Four major overlapping processes have been identified in wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, reepithelialization and granulation tissue formation, and tissue remodeling. Carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule 1 (CEACAM1) is a glycoprotein expressed in epithelial, endothelial, lymphoid, and myeloid cells. Given its known roles in angiogenesis, cell migration, and immune functions, we hypothesized that CEACAM1 might also be involved in cutaneous wound healing and that a number of relevant CEACAM1-positive cell types might contribute to wound healing. To evaluate the role of CEACAM1 in these processes, 6-mm-diameter skin wounds were inflicted on Ceacam1(-/-) and wild-type mice. Herein, we demonstrate that CEACAM1 deletion indeed affects wound healing in three key ways. Infiltration of F4/80(+) macrophages was decreased in Ceacam1(-/-) wounds, altering inflammatory processes. Reepithelialization in Ceacam1(-/-) wounds was delayed. Furthermore, the vascular density of the granulation tissue in Ceacam1(-/-) wounds was significantly diminished. These results confirm CEACAM1's role as an important regulator of key processes in cutaneous wound healing, although whether this works via a specific cell type or alterations in the functioning of multiple processes remains to be determined.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".