Aggrecan heterogeneity in articular cartilage from patients with osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aggrecan degradation is the hallmark of cartilage degeneration in osteoarthritis (OA), though it is unclear whether a common proteolytic process occurs in all individuals. METHODS: Aggrecan degradation in articular cartilage from the knees of 33 individuals with OA, who were undergoing joint replacement surgery, was studied by immunoblotting of tissue extracts. RESULTS: Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and aggrecanases are the major proteases involved in aggrecan degradation within the cartilage, though the proportion of aggrecan cleavage attributable to MMPs or aggrecanases was variable between individuals. However, aggrecanases were more associated with the increase in aggrecan loss associated with OA than MMPs. While the extent of aggrecan cleavage was highly variable between individuals, it was greatest in areas of cartilage adjacent to sites of cartilage erosion compared to sites more remote within the same joint. Analysis of link protein shows that in some individuals additional proteolytic mechanisms must also be involved to some extent. CONCLUSIONS: The present studies indicate that there is no one protease, or a fixed combination of proteases, responsible for cartilage degradation in OA. Thus, rather than targeting the individual proteases for OA therapy, directing research to techniques that control global protease generation may be more productive.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".