Effect of bone graft substitute on marrow stromal cell proliferation and differentiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marrow stromal cells (MSCs) are ideally suited for tissue engineered bone grafts since they have the potential to regenerate bone, but may also maintain the homeostasis of the repaired tissue through their ability for self-renewal. An ideal bone graft substitute should support MSC self-renewal as well as differentiation to ensure complete bone defect regeneration and maintenance. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the effect of different substrate materials on MSC expansion and differentiation. Calcium polyphosphate (CPP), bone and hydroxyapatite/tricalcium phosphate (HA/TCP) were seeded with rat MSCs and maintained in culture conditions that promote cell expansion. At 0, 3, 7, 14, and 21 days cell numbers were determined by measuring their metabolic activity using a MTT assay and the frequency of cycling cells by 24 hr BrdU incorporation. Osteogenic, chondrogenic, and adipogenic marker expression in these cultures was measured by qRT-PCR. An initial drop in cell numbers was observed on all substrates. CPP and bone, but not HA/TCP supported an increase in proliferating cells at day 14 and 21. In addition, no upregulation of mature bone markers was observed in cells cultured on CPP and bone, which suggests that these substrates support the expansion of undifferentiated MSCs. In contrast, cell numbers on HA/TCP decreased with time and only rare BrdU positive cells were observed. This decrease in proliferation correlated with the down regulation of osteogenic progenitor markers and the substantial increase in mature osteocyte markers, indicating that HA/TCP favors MSC differentiation and maturation along the osteogenic lineage.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".