MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330719933 · doi:10.1097/bcr.0000000000000271

Serum Decorin, Interleukin-1β, and Transforming Growth Factor-β Predict Hypertrophic Scarring Postburn

2015· article· en· W2330719933 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Kwan, Jie Ding, Edward E. Tredget

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecorinHypertrophic scarMedicineInterleukinTransforming growth factorCytokinePeripheral blood mononuclear cellGrowth factorTransforming growth factor betaReceptorImmunologyPathologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyIn vitroChemistryAnatomyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypertrophic scar after burn injury is a significant problem. Previous studies have examined the roles for decorin, interleukin-1β, and transforming growth factor-β1 in hypertrophic scar formation locally, but few have considered their systemic influence. The authors conducted a pilot study to examine whether serum levels of these molecules could predict hypertrophic scar formation. Serum levels were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and hypertrophic scar formation determined from chart reviews. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells and fibroblasts were stimulated with decorin, interleukin-1β, and transforming growth factor-β1, and expression of profibrotic molecules examined using flow cytometry, immunofluorescence microscopy, quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and mass spectrometry. Multiple linear regression analysis suggested early serum levels of decorin and interleukin-1β, and late serum levels of transforming growth factor-β1 were predictive of hypertrophic scar formation. Decorin up-regulated the expression of toll-like receptor 4 and C-X-C receptor 4 in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and interleukin-1β up-regulated fibroblast production of C-X-C ligand 12. Transforming growth factor-β1 up-regulated, and interleukin-1β down-regulated, the production of profibrotic cytokines, collagen, and myofibroblast differentiation. The model predicting hypertrophic scar formation is supported by clinical results and limited in vitro experiments.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207