MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151796911 · doi:10.1177/0022034510378684

TGF-β1 and FAK Regulate Periostin Expression in PDL Fibroblasts

2010· article· en· W2151796911 on OpenAlexafffund
Wei-Lun Wen, Eddy Chau, Linda Jackson‐Boeters, Christopher G. Elliott, Tom D. Daley, Douglas W. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Fibrosis and Remodeling
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersInstitute of Musculoskeletal Health and ArthritisCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPeriostinPeriodontal fiberChemistryFibroblastCell biologyIn vitroFocal adhesionMessenger RNATransforming growth factorMolecular biologySignal transductionBiologyExtracellular matrixMedicineDentistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently identified as a key component of the murine periodontal ligament (PDL), periostin has been implicated in the regulation of collagen fibrillogenesis and fibroblast differentiation. We investigated whether periostin protein is expressed in the human PDL in situ and the mechanisms regulating periostin expression in PDL fibroblasts in vitro. With immunohistochemistry, periostin protein was identified in the PDL, with expression lower in teeth with reduced occlusal loading. In vitro application of uniaxial cyclic strain to PDL fibroblasts elevated periostin mRNA levels, depending on the age of the patient. Treatment with transforming growth factor-beta1 (TGF-β1) also significantly increased periostin mRNA levels, an effect attenuated by focal adhesion kinase (FAK) inhibition. FAK-null fibroblasts contained no detectable periostin mRNA, even after stimulation with cyclic strain. In conclusion, periostin protein is strongly expressed in the human PDL. In vitro, periostin mRNA levels are modulated by cyclic strain as well as TGF-β1 via FAK-dependent pathways.

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)0.002
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 score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations77
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dental ResearchSame topicCardiac Fibrosis and RemodelingFrench-language works237,207