Inhibition of the prothrombinase complex on red blood cells by heparin and covalent antithrombin-heparin complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of red blood cells (RBCs) in coagulation is not well understood. Overt exposure of phosphatidylserine on surfaces of RBCs provide docking sites for formation of the prothrombinase complex, which further aids in amplification of coagulation leading to subsequent thrombosis. No studies to date have evaluated heparin inhibition of the RBC-prothrombinase system. Therefore, this study examines the ability of heparin and a covalent antithrombin-heparin complex (ATH) to inhibit the RBC-prothrombinase system. Discontinuous inhibition assays were performed to obtain k₂ values for inhibition of free or prothrombinase-bound Xa by antithrombin and unfractionated heparin (AT + UFH) versus ATH. In addition, components of the complex (prothrombin, RBCs or Va) were excluded prior to reaction with inhibitors to investigate potential mechanisms involved. Inhibition of thrombin generation, fibrinogen conversion and plasma clotting by the RBC-prothrombinase system was also examined. Protection of Xa was observed for AT + UFH and not for ATH reactions. Inhibition rates for ATH were significantly faster when compared with AT + UFH results. The greatest impact on Xa inhibition was observed from factor Va omission for both inhibitors. ATH inhibited thrombin generation, fibrinogen conversion and plasma clotting better compared with AT + UFH. This study determined potential control of coagulation contributed by RBCs. Moreover, greater control of coagulation is achieved by covalently linking heparin to AT.
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".