MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fate and protective effect of marrow stromal cells after subretinal transplantation

2008· article· en· W2127237432 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hong Pan, Xinjian Liu, Jihong Wu, Yuhua Tian, Shenghai Zhang, Zhixin Lin, Qian Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Biochimica et Biophysica Sinica · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics
KeywordsStromal cellBone marrow transplantationTransplantationMedicinePathologyCancer researchBone marrowImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Engraftment of marrow stromal cells (MSCs) has been proposed as a therapeutic approach for degenerative diseases. In this study we investigated the fate and dynamic progress of grafted MSCs in living retina with the aim of evaluating the use of transplanted MSCs to treat retinal degeneration. Approximately 1x10(5) gfp-MSCs in 2 microl phosphate-buffered saline were injected into the subretinal space of adult Sprague-Dawley rats. Two weeks later, approximately 0.174%+/-0.082% of the transplanted cells had survived and diffused into the subretinal space. Nine weeks after transplantation the surviving gfp-MSCs accounted for 0.049%+/-0.023% of the number of cells injected and were mainly located at the injection site. The same number of MSCs were transplanted into the left eye subretinal space of 3-week-old hereditary retinal degenerative Royal College of Surgeons rats, and phosphate-buffered saline was injected into their right eyes as a control. Five weeks after transplantation, the amount of rudimentary photoreceptors was more significantly increased in grafted eyes than in control eyes. The results indicated that grafted MSCs could survive and rescue retinal degeneration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Biochimica et Biophysica SinicaSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207