MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142870348 · doi:10.1002/jemt.10252

Angiogenesis of the heart

2003· review· en· W2142870348 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy Research and Technique · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngiogenesisArteriogenesisMedicineVasculogenesisTherapeutic angiogenesisRevascularizationAngioplastyFibroblast growth factorArteryGenetic enhancementCardiologyCoronary artery diseaseVascular endothelial growth factorRestenosisNeovascularizationInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionGeneStem cellProgenitor cellVEGF receptorsStentBiologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite continued advances in the prevention and treatment of coronary artery disease, there are still a large number of patients who are not candidates for the conventional revascularization techniques of balloon angioplasty and stenting, or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Therapeutic angiogenesis, in the form of the administration of growth factor protein or gene therapy, has emerged as a promising new method of treatment for patients with coronary artery disease. The goal of this strategy is to promote the development of supplemental blood conduits that will act as endogenous bypass vessels. New vessel formation occurs through the processes of angiogenesis, vasculogenesis, and arteriogenesis, under the control of growth factors such as those that belong to the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), fibroblast growth factor (FGF) and angiopoeitin (Ang) families of molecules. Preclinical studies have suggested that such an approach is both feasible and effective; however many questions remain to be answered. This review will address the elements of pharmacologic revascularization, focusing on gene and protein-based therapy. The important growth factors, the vector (for gene therapy), routes of delivery, the desired therapeutic effect, and quantifiable clinical end points for trials of angiogenesis will all be addressed.

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.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.357 · 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