MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140420195 · doi:10.1081/erc-120016978

FIBRONECTIN, LAMININ, AND COLLAGEN IV INTERACT WITH ACTH AND ANGIOTENSIN II TO DICTATE SPECIFIC CELL BEHAVIOR AND SECRETION IN HUMAN FETAL ADRENAL CELLS IN CULTURE

2002· article· en· W2140420195 on OpenAlexafffund
Estelle Chamoux, Agnàs Narcy, Jean‐Guy Lehoux, Nicole Gallo‐Payet

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrine Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCell Adhesion Molecules Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsFibronectinEndocrinologyInternal medicineLamininExtracellular matrixSecretionBiologyAngiotensin IIExtracellularCell biologyChemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whereas collagen IV is expressed throughout the fetal adrenal gland during the second trimester of human development, fibronectin, and laminin demonstrate a rather mirror-image distribution, with higher expression of fibronectin in the central portion and laminin at the periphery of the gland. In the present study, extracellular matrices were able to modulate the profile of steroid secretion in primary cultures: collagen IV favored cortisol secretion following adrenocorticotropin (ACTH) or angiotensin II (Ang II) stimulation while specific stimulation of the AT2 receptor of Ang II elicited dehydroepiandrostenedione (DHEA) production. These effects were correlated by changes in mRNA levels of 3beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (3beta-HSD) and cytochrome P450C17. In contrast, fibronectin and laminin decreased cell responsiveness to ACTH in terms of cortisol secretion, but enhanced ACTH-stimulated androgen secretion. Finally, extracellular matrices were able to orchestrate cell behavior: collagen IV and laminin enhanced cell proliferation whereas fibronectin incited cell death. These results indicate that the nature of extracellular matrix coordinates specific steroidogenic pathways and cell turnover in the developing human fetal adrenal gland.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations21
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndocrine ResearchSame topicCell Adhesion Molecules ResearchFrench-language works237,207