In vitro differences between venous and arterial-derived smooth muscle cells: potential modulatory role of decorin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the phenotypic and functional differences between venous and arterial smooth muscle cells (SMC) and the role of decorin in modulating these differences. METHODS AND RESULTS: SMC were isolated from the jugular veins and carotid arteries of male white New Zealand rabbits. Venous SMC demonstrated increased proliferation (2-fold, p<0.001), migration (1.7-fold, p<0.001), and collagen synthesis (4-fold, p<0.001), with decreased adhesion to collagen and fibronectin (1.2-fold, p<0.01) compared to arterial SMC. Higher levels of gelatinase activity (MMP-2 and MMP-9) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP) were also observed in venous SMC. Venous SMC demonstrated increased expression of SMemb and decreased expression of SM1--markers of a dedifferentiated and differentiated phenotype, respectively. Arterial SMC produced increased levels of the inhibitory proteoglycan, decorin, compared to venous SMC. Conditioned medium from arterial SMC (ASMC-CM) significantly decreased DNA synthesis, collagen synthesis, and gelatinase activity in venous SMC. Removal of decorin from ASMC-CM by immunoprecipitation significantly reversed the inhibitory effects of ASMC-CM on venous SMC proliferation and collagen synthesis but did not affect gelatinase activities. CONCLUSION: Venous SMC are more dedifferentiated and demonstrate increased proliferative and synthetic capacity than arterial SMC. Differential decorin expression between arterial and venous SMC contributes to these differences in biologic behavior. Venous SMC properties may contribute to accelerated atherosclerosis in venous bypass grafts.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".