MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2286250564 · doi:10.5966/sctm.2014-0162

Functional Differences Between Placental Micro- and Macrovascular Endothelial Colony-Forming Cells

2016· article· en· W2286250564 on OpenAlexafffund
Ioana Solomon, Megan O’Reilly, Lavinia Ionescu, Rajesh S. Alphonse, Saima Rajabali, Shumei Zhong, Arul Vadivel, W. Chris Shelley, Mervin C. Yöder, Bernard Thébaud

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cells Translational Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of OttawaWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMatrigelCD146PreeclampsiaPlacentaCD31VasculogenesisEndoglinFetal membraneImmunologyBiologyAndrologyStem cellCell biologyProgenitor cellMedicineFetusCD34AngiogenesisCancer researchPregnancyImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Alterations in the development of the placental vasculature can lead to pregnancy complications, such as preeclampsia. Currently, the cause of preeclampsia is unknown, and there are no specific prevention or treatment strategies. Further insight into the placental vasculature may aid in identifying causal factors. Endothelial colony-forming cells (ECFCs) are a subset of endothelial progenitor cells capable of self-renewal and de novo vessel formation in vitro. We hypothesized that ECFCs exist in the micro- and macrovasculature of the normal, term human placenta. Human placentas were collected from term pregnancies delivered by cesarean section (n = 16). Placental micro- and macrovasculature was collected from the maternal and fetal side of the placenta, respectively, and ECFCs were isolated and characterized. ECFCs were CD31+, CD105+, CD144+, CD146+, CD14−, and CD45−, took up 1,1′-dioctadecyl-3,3,3′,3′-tetramethyl-indocarbocyanine perchlorate-labeled acetylated low-density lipoprotein, and bound Ulex europaeus agglutinin 1. In vitro, macrovascular ECFCs had a greater potential to generate high-proliferative colonies and formed more complex capillary-like networks on Matrigel compared with microvascular ECFCs. In contrast, in vivo assessment demonstrated that microvascular ECFCs had a greater potential to form vessels. Macrovascular ECFCs were of fetal origin, whereas microvascular ECFCs were of maternal origin. ECFCs exist in the micro- and macrovasculature of the normal, term human placenta. Although macrovascular ECFCs demonstrated greater vessel and colony-forming potency in vitro, this did not translate in vivo, where microvascular ECFCs exhibited a greater vessel-forming ability. These important findings contribute to the current understanding of normal placental vascular development and may aid in identifying factors involved in preeclampsia and other pregnancy complications. Significance This research confirms that resident endothelial colony-forming cells (ECFCs) exist in the micro- and macrovasculature of the normal, term human placenta. Their isolation from two different anatomical locations yields two functionally different ECFC populations. Investigation of these ECFC populations during placental pathologies, such as preeclampsia, may lead to a better understanding of the disease process and aid in developing new therapies.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations28
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStem Cells Translational MedicineSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207