MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300098630

Macrophage Interactions with Decellularized Heart Valve Materials: Influence of Crosslinking Treatment

2010· article· en· W2300098630 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonathan Keith McDade

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecellularizationMacrophageHeart valveChemistryMaterials scienceCardiologyBiomedical engineeringMedicineBiochemistryTissue engineeringIn vitro
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While macrophages have been implicated in the failure of bioprosthetic heart valves, there is no current literature on the macrophage response to crosslinked, native collagen. Using decellularized bovine pericardium (DBP) as a model, this study investigates the response of macrophage-like cells (U937s) to untreated DBP and DBP under two chemical crosslinking techniques: glutaraldehyde (GLUT) and an alternative zero-length crosslinker 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-carbodiimide (EDC). U937 cells were seeded and differentiated directly on the material surfaces. At 72 h after differentiation, the samples were fixed for SEM as well as analyzed for acid phosphatase activity, cytokine and matrix metalloproteinase release, all normalized to the number of live, adherent cells via DNA analysis. The U937 cells on the GLUT surface showed an abnormal morphology not seen on the other surfaces. These cells released more pro-inflammatory cytokines, and less MMP-2 and MMP-9 than occurred under EDC treatment or in untreated DBP. The results suggest that host inflammatory cells react to the crosslinking state of the DBP, perhaps as a non-specific response.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207