OP-1 injection increases VEGF expression but not angiogenesis in a rabbit model of distraction osteogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have previously shown that a single injection of rhBMP-7 (OP-1) applied to the regenerate early during distraction accelerates bone consolidation in a rabbit model of distraction osteogenesis. In the present study, we hypothesised that the injection of OP-1 improves bone consolidation by increasing blood flow to the distracted site. Blood flow into the regenerate of a rabbit model was measured and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) expression was tested using semi-quantitative PCR. Immunohistochemistry was used for assessing the temporal and spatial expression of platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule (PECAM), VEGF and its receptors following OP-1 injection. We observed a higher expression of VEGF and its receptors in the regenerate with OP-1 treatment. However, there was no difference in the increase in bone blood flow nor PECAM expression between the treated and control groups of animals. Interestingly, the increased expression of VEGF and its receptors was associated with chondrocyte and fibroblast-like cells, but not with endothelial cells. These results suggest that accelerated ossification by OP-1 may depend on a non-vascular mechanism, possibly involving a non-angiogenic function of VEGF signalling.
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".