Loss of PPARγ expression by fibroblasts enhances dermal wound closure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)γ may be a key regulator of connective tissue deposition and remodeling in vivo. PPARγ expression is reduced in dermal fibroblasts isolated from fibrotic areas of scleroderma patients; PPARγ agonists suppress the persistent fibrotic phenotype of this cell type. Previously, we showed that loss of PPARγ expression in fibroblasts resulted in enhanced bleomycin-induced skin fibrosis. However, whether loss of PPARγ expression in skin fibroblasts affects cutaneous tissue repair or homeostasis is unknown. RESULTS: Mice deleted for PPARγ in skin fibroblasts show an enhanced rate of dermal wound closure, concomitant with elevated phosphorylation of Smad3, Akt and ERK, and increased expression of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), collagen, α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) and CCN2. Conversely, dermal homeostasis was not appreciably affected by loss of PPARγ expression. CONCLUSION: PPARγ expression by fibroblasts suppresses cutaneous tissue repair. In the future, direct PPARγ antagonists and agonists might be of clinical benefit in controlling chronic wounds or scarring, respectively.
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) | 0.003 | 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".