175 Peripheral Blood Fibrocytes in Fibroproliferative Disorders (FPD) of the Skin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Fibrocytes are a unique bone marrow origin leukocyte subpopulation which display fibroblast-like properties and are antigen-presenting cells that are up-regulated systemically after burn injury. This study investigated their role in FPD of the skin using leukocyte-specific protein-1 (LSP1) specific for fibrocytes in HTS, keloids, and mature scar. Materials and Methods: Fibrocytes were cultured from PBMC isolated from burn patients and normal individuals. Skin biopsies were taken from burn patients with hypertrophic (3) and mature scar (3) and normal skin (20) as well as patients with keloids (3). Double immunostaining (IHC) with antibodies to LSP1 and to the C-propeptide of type I collagen were performed on cryosections to identify fibrocytes in tissue. Extraction of fibrocytes from keloids, HTS, mature scar, and normal skin allowed quantification of fibrocytes by flow cytometry. Results: LSP1 was found in both fibrocytes and lymphocytes, but not in fibroblasts. Western blot analysis showed that LSP1 expression was significantly higher in fibrocytes than in lymphocytes obtained from all five patients examined. Fibrocytes in hypertrophic scar were seen as duallabeled spindle-shaped cells. In normal skin, fibrocytes were present in the upper layers of the dermis and <1% of cells extracted, whereas, approximately threefold more fibrocytes were found in HTS and primarily in the papillary dermis. Preliminary data suggests that normal dermis contains 0.51% ± 0.35 fibrocytes, mature scar 0.30% ± .031, keloids 1.18 ± 0.22, and HTS 1.12%. Conclusions: Fibrocytes are up-regulated systemically after injury and in FPD in skin where they appear to be up-regulated contributing to the development of keloids and hypertrophic scarring. More investigation is required to determine the functional roles of these bone marrow derived cells in fibroproliferative disorders.
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".