Deep Dermal Fibroblasts Refractory to Migration and Decorin-Induced Apoptosis Contribute to Hypertrophic Scarring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypertrophic scar (HTS) represents the dermal equivalent of fibroproliferative disorders. Fibroblasts from the deep dermis are implicated in the development of HTS after injuries that involve deeper areas of the skin. However, fibroblasts that reside in the superficial layer of the skin show antifibrotic properties, and injuries limited to this area heal with little or no scarring. Previously, cellular and molecular characteristics of superficial fibroblasts and deep dermal fibroblasts that may influence HTS formation were analyzed. In this study, differences in cellular behavior between superficial fibroblasts and deep dermal fibroblasts that may also affect the development of HTS or tissue fibrosis were further characterized. Immunostaining and migration, adhesion, apoptosis, and cell viability assays were performed in fibroblasts from the superficial and deep dermis. Reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction was used to examine the gene expression of molecules involved in cell death after treatment of fibroblasts with decorin. When compared with superficial fibroblasts, deep dermal fibroblasts showed lower migration rates. Although all the fibroblasts tested showed no difference in adhesion to fibronectin, superficial fibroblasts demonstrated increased apoptotic and dead cells when treated with decorin. Decorin resulted in a significant increase in the expression of apoptosis markers, histone-1, caspase-1, caspase-8, and p53 in superficial fibroblasts when compared with deep dermal fibroblasts. Taken together, the findings suggest that reduced migration, lack of decorin, and resistance of deep dermal fibroblasts to decorin-induced apoptosis may result in hypercellularity in injuries involving the deep dermis, leading to deposition of excess extracellular matrix and HTS formation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".