Skin Electroporation of a Plasmid Encoding hCAP-18/LL-37 Host Defense Peptide Promotes Wound Healing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Host defense peptides, in particular LL-37, are emerging as potential therapeutics for promoting wound healing and inhibiting bacterial growth. However, effective delivery of the LL-37 peptide remains limiting. We hypothesized that skin-targeted electroporation of a plasmid encoding hCAP-18/LL-37 would promote the healing of wounds. The plasmid was efficiently delivered to full-thickness skin wounds by electroporation and it induced expression of LL-37 in the epithelium. It significantly accelerated reepithelialization of nondiabetic and diabetic wounds and caused a significant VEGFa and interleukin (IL)-6 induction. IL-6 was involved in LL-37-mediated keratinocyte migration in vitro and IL-6 neutralizing antibodies delivered to mice were able to suppress the wound healing activity of the hCAP-18/LL-37 plasmid. In a hindlimb ischemia model, electroporation of the hCAP-18/LL-37 plasmid increased blood perfusion, reduced muscular atrophy, and upregulated the angiogenic chemokines VEGFa and SDF-1a, and their receptors VEGF-R and CXCR-4. These findings demonstrate that a localized gene therapy with LL-37 is a promising approach for the treatment of wounds.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".