Novel Methods for the Investigation of Human Hypertrophic Scarring and Other Dermal Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypertrophic scar (HTS) represents the dermal equivalent of fibroproliferative disorders that occur after injury involving the deep dermis while superficial wounds to the skin heal with minimal or no scarring. HTS is characterized by progressive deposition of collagen that occurs with high frequency in adult dermal wounds following traumatic or thermal injury. Increased levels of transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1), decreased expression of small leucine-rich proteoglycans (SLRPs), and/or fibroblast subtypes may influence the development of HTS. The development of HTS is strongly influenced by the cellular and molecular properties of fibroblast subtypes, where cytokines such as fibrotic TGF-β1 and CTGF as well as the expression of SLRPs, particularly decorin and fibromodulin, regulate collagen fibrillogenesis and the activity of TGF-β1. Reduced anti-fibrotic molecules in the ECM of the deep dermis and the distinctive behavior of the fibroblasts in this region of the dermis which display increased sensitivity to TGF-β1's biological activity contribute to the development of HTS following injury to the deep dermis. By comparing the cellular and molecular differences involved in deep and superficial wound healing in an experimental wound scratch model in humans that has both superficial and deep injuries within the same excisional model, our aim is to increase our understanding of how tissue repair following injury to the deep dermis can be changed to promote healing with a similar pattern to healing that occurs following superficial injury that results in no or minimal scarring. Studying the characteristics of superficial dermal injuries that heal with minimal scarring will help us identify therapeutic approaches for tissue engineering and wound healing. In addition, our ability to develop novel therapies for HTS is hampered by limitations in the available animal models used to study this disorder in vivo. We also describe a nude mouse model of transplanted human skin that develops a hypertrophic proliferative scar consistent morphologically and histologically with human HTS, which can be used to test novel treatment options for these dermal fibrotic conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".