The bone marrow–cardiac axis: role of endothelial progenitor cells in heart failure☆
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Congestive heart failure (CHF) remains a leading cause of mortality in the developed world. The complex mechanisms involved in the pathophysiology of heart failure (HF) explain some of the limited impact of current recognised therapeutic strategies. There is, therefore, a definite need for new alternative molecular and biological pathways to address the treatment of this condition. Over the past decade, much research has focussed upon identifying the ideal cell type to promote myocardial regeneration. Recently, striking reports suggested the concept that bone-marrow (BM)-derived endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) participate in cardiac regeneration and function recovery in the setting of progressive HF. The modulation of this complex interaction between the BM and the circulating EPCs could be at the crossroad of multiple therapeutic strategies aimed to protect or restore the myocardium in the setting of the CHF. However, there are uncertainties and unresolved issues regarding the mechanisms possibly responsible for the functional benefits observed in chronic experimental and pre-clinical studies. Hence, the BM-cardiac axis concept has created overwhelming enthusiasm and subsequent scepticism in the field of cardiac repair and regeneration. Further intensive research in basic science and clinical arenas are needed to elucidate the potential association between BM and heart function recovery, particularly in the progression towards advance stages of CHF. In this review, we focus on the importance of the BM-cardiac axis and BM-derived EPCs in the pathophysiology, clinical progression and potential treatment of CHF.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".