Tissue-engineered human asthmatic bronchial equivalents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The isolation of human bronchial epithelial (HBEC) and fibroblastic cells (HBFC) from biopsies of asthmatic and non-asthmatic volunteers provided unique cellular materials to be used for the production of bioengineered bronchial equivalents (BE) in vitro. The HBEC are grown on a mesenchymal layer seeded with HBFC and the BE can be maintained for at least 15 days in culture. Under the BE culture conditions established previously, HBEC undergo differentiation into ciliated and goblet cells, within a pseudostratified organization comparable to human bronchi. We published previously the results from histologic and functional analyses of such BE produced exclusively using non-asthmatic HBEC and HBFC. We report here the comparative analyses of BE produced with non-asthmatic and asthmatic living HBEC and HBFC (naBE and aBE, respectively). Our data indicated that all asthmatic HBEC populations grown on a mesenchymal layer, containing non-asthmatic HBFC, slowly reached a confluent state but then detached from the matrix upon culture time. These BE appear to be very good models to study the mechanisms involved in asthma in vitro.
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) | 0.003 | 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".