Effect of Blockade of Tumor Necrosis Factor-α with Etanercept on Surgical Wound Healing in SWISS-OF1 Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether blockade of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) influences surgical wound healing in a normal mouse experimental model. METHODS: Wound healing time course and degree of surgical wound collagenization were measured by morphological techniques and digital image analysis in 80 male SWISS-OF1 mice (40 received subcutaneous etanercept at a dose of 0.1 mg/25 g/ at -7, 0, 7, and 14 days). RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between treated and untreated animals in wound healing, re-epithelialization, or formation of inflammatory infiltrate or granulation tissue at days 7, 15, or 20 after surgery. At 20 days, the collagen area was larger in treated versus untreated mice (109,029 +/- 28,489 microm(2) vs 79,305 +/- 19,798 microm(2), p = 0.026, Mann-Whitney U test). CONCLUSION: Surgical wounds showed a higher degree of collagenization at 20 days in etanercept-treated versus untreated mice, with no differences in the time course of wound healing. These data suggest that biological therapies to block TNF-alpha do not affect wound healing and do not need to be suspended during the perioperative period.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".