MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098945440 · doi:10.1080/08820530601182782

Epicutaneous Exposure to Anticoagulant Rodenticide Warfarin Modulates Local Skin Activity in Rats

2007· article· en· W2098945440 on OpenAlexaff
Milena Kataranovski, Dragan Kataranovski, Lidija Zolotarevski, Milena Jović

Bibliographic record

VenueCutaneous and Ocular Toxicology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiotin and Related Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWarfarinDegranulationDermisAnticoagulantPharmacologyEpidermis (zoology)ImmunohistochemistryMedicineChemistryPathologyInternal medicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dermatotoxic effects of epicutaneous application of a first generation anticoagulant, warfarin (WF), were examined in rats. Selected parameters of skin activity were determined 24 hours following warfarin application by histomorphological and immunohistochemical analysis and by assessing some aspects of immunomodulatory potential of warfarin in skin. Increased number of mast cells, with degranulation at higher doses of warfarin was noted in warfarin treated skin. Mast cell presence coincided with changes in blood vessels and fibroblast appearance suggesting mast cell activity in warfarin treated skin. Signs of nuclear hypertrophy and anysonucleosys were noted by analysis of PCNA(+) cells in epidermis following warfarin application. Histomorphological changes were accompanied by immunemodulating activity in warfarin treated skin. This was judged by slightly increased numbers of CD3(+) cells in epidermis and superficial dermis and by production of organ cultured full thickness skin explants of factors with costimulatory activity in T-cell activation/proliferation assay. Presented data demonstrates the potential of warfarin to modulate local skin activity in rats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCutaneous and Ocular ToxicologySame topicBiotin and Related StudiesFrench-language works237,207