The biological effects of lung-derived mediators on the liver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the use of lung-protective mechanical ventilation (MV), the mortality of patients with acute lung injury remains at 30 to 40%, predominantly due to multiorgan failure. The objective of this study was to determine the biological significance of lung-derived mediators on peripheral organ inflammation. The authors utilized an isolated perfused mouse lung model of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced lung inflammation and protective MV to collect lung-derived mediators. Aliquots of perfusate from these animals (or appropriate controls) were then injected intravenously into a cohort of normal animals whose livers were subsequently assessed in vivo using intravital video microscopy. Perfusate from LPS-inflamed lungs contained significantly higher concentrations of inflammatory mediators than perfusate from saline-instilled lungs. Assessment of livers in the second cohort of animals 120 minutes after perfusate injection revealed decreased sinusoidal blood flow, leukocytosis, and increased cell death in those receiving perfusate from LPS-inflamed lungs compared to perfusate from saline controls. There were no differences between control animals that received pure perfusate or pure LPS mixed with perfusate. These results showed that lung-derived mediators had a significant biological effect on nonpulmonary organs within a short period of time after administration. Therapies targeting these mediators may prevent multiorgan failure and death in patients with acute lung injury.
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".