MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148853882 · doi:10.1186/s40635-015-0065-y

Mesenchymal stromal cells are more effective than the MSC secretome in diminishing injury and enhancing recovery following ventilator-induced lung injury

2015· article· en· W2148853882 on OpenAlexafffund
Mairéad Hayes, Gerard F. Curley, Claire Masterson, James Devaney, Daniel O’Toole, John G. Laffey

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive Care Medicine Experimental · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersUniversity of TorontoCanadian Anesthesiologists' SocietyHealth Research Board
KeywordsMesenchymal stem cellMedicineLungMechanical ventilationBronchoalveolar lavagePulmonary edemaAnesthesiaVentilation (architecture)EdemaCell therapyPathologySurgeryStem cellInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The potential for mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) to reduce the severity of experimental lung injury has been established in several pre-clinical studies. We have recently demonstrated that MSCs, and MSC-secreted factors (secretome), enhance lung repair and regeneration at 48 h following ventilation-induced lung injury (VILI). We wished to determine the potential for MSC therapy to exert beneficial effects in the early recovery phase following VILI when ongoing injury coexists with processes of repair, and to compare the efficacy of MSC therapy to the use of the secretome alone. METHODS: Male Sprague-Dawley rats were anesthetized, oro-tracheally intubated, and subjected to high stretch mechanical ventilation until lung compliance had declined by 50 % of baseline. Animals were then weaned from mechanical ventilation, and anesthesia discontinued. Once awake and spontaneously ventilating, animals received an intravenous injection of either rodent MSCs (10 million/kg), MSC-conditioned medium, fibroblasts (10 million/kg), or vehicle. Thereafter, the animals were allowed to recover and the extent of lung injury/repair was determined after 4 h. RESULTS: Treatment with MSCs diminished injury and enhanced recovery following VILI to a greater extent compared to MSC-conditioned medium, with fibroblasts proving ineffective. MSCs, but not their conditioned medium, attenuated indices of lung injury including oxygenation, respiratory compliance, and lung edema. Total lung water as assessed by wet:dry ratio, bronchoalveolar lavage total inflammatory cell, neutrophil counts, and alveolar IL-6 concentrations were reduced in the animals that received MSC therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The immunomodulating and/or reparative effect of MSCs is evident early after VILI in this model. MSC-conditioned medium was not as effective as the cells themselves in diminishing injury and restoring lung structure and function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations76
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive Care Medicine ExperimentalSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207