Effects of hypoxia on rat airway smooth muscle cell proliferation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although it is well known that hypoxemia induces pulmonary vasoconstriction and vascular remodeling, due to the proliferation of both vascular smooth muscle cells and fibroblasts, the effects of hypoxemia on airway smooth muscle cells are not well characterized. The present study was designed to assess the in vitro effects of hypoxia (1 or 3% O(2)) on rat airway smooth muscle cell growth and response to mitogens (PDGF and 5-HT). Cell growth was assessed by cell counting and cell cycle analysis. Compared with normoxia (21% O(2)), there was a 42.2% increase in the rate of proliferation of cells exposed to 3% O(2) (72 h, P = 0.006), as well as an enhanced response to PDGF (13.9% increase; P = 0.023) and to 5-HT (17.2% increase; P = 0.039). Exposure to 1% O(2) (72 h) decreased cell proliferation by 21.0% (P = 0.017) and reduced the increase in cell proliferation induced by PGDF and 5-HT by 16.2 and 15.7%, respectively (P = 0.019 and P = 0.011). A significant inhibition in hypoxia-induced cell proliferation was observed after the administration of bisindolylmaleimide GF-109203X (a specific PKC inhibitor) or downregulation of PKC with PMA. Pretreatment with GF-109203X decreased proliferation by 21.5% (P = 0.004) and PMA by 31.5% (P = 0.005). These results show that hypoxia induces airway smooth muscle cell proliferation, which is at least partially dependent on PKC activation. They suggest that hypoxia could contribute to airway remodeling in patients suffering from chronic, severe respiratory diseases.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".