Evidence of a Role for Fibrocyte and Keratinocyte-like Cells in the Formation of Hypertrophic Scars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Burn injuries affect millions of people every year, and dermal fibrosis is a common complication for the victims. This disfigurement has functional and cosmetic consequences and many research groups have made it the focus of their work to understand the mechanisms that underlie its development. Although significant progress has been made in wound-healing processes, the complexity of events involved makes it very difficult to come up with a single strategy to prevent this devastating fibrotic condition. Inflammation is considered one predisposing factor, although this phase is a necessary aspect of the wound-healing process. Inflammation, driven by infiltrated immune cells, begins minutes after the burn injury and is the prevalent phase of wound healing in the early stages. Accompanying the inflammatory infiltrate, there is evidence that subpopulations of bone marrow-derived cells are also present. These populations include fibrocytes and keratinocyte-like cells, derivatives of CD14 monocytes, a component of the peripheral blood mononuclear cell infiltrate. There is evidence that these cells contribute to regeneration and repair of the wound site, but it is interesting to note that there are also reports that these cells can have adverse effects and may contribute to the development of dermal fibrosis. In this article, the authors present a review of the origin and transdifferentiation of these cells from bone marrow stem cells, the environments that direct this transdifferentiation, and evidence to support their role in fibrosis, as well as potential avenues for therapeutics to control their fibrotic effects.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".