Relationship of Circulating CXCR4+ EPC with Prognosis of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the changes of circulating endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) and stromal cell-derived factor-1α (SDF-1α)/CXCR4 expression in patients with mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) and the correlation between EPC level and the prognosis of mild TBI. 72 TBI patients (57 mild TBI, 15 moderate TBI patients) and 25 healthy subjects (control) were included. The number of circulating EPCs, CD34+, and CD133+ cells and the percentage of CXCR4+ cells in each cell population at 1,4,7,14,21 days after TBI were counted by flow cytometer. SDF-1α levels in serum were detected by ELISA assay. The patients were divided into poor and good prognosis groups based on Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale and Activity of Daily Living Scale at 3 months after TBI. Correlation analysis between each detected index and prognosis of mild TBI was performed. Moderate TBI patients have higher levels of SDF-1α and CXCR4 expression than mild TBI patients (P < 0.05). The percentage of CXCR4+ EPCs at day 7 post-TBI was significantly higher in mild TBI patients with poor prognosis than the ones with good prognosis (P < 0.05). HAMA and HAMD scores in mild TBI patients were significantly lower than moderate TBI patients (P < 0.05) in early term. The percentage of CXCR4+ EPCs at day 7 after TBI was significantly correlated with the prognosis outcome at 3 months. The mobilization of circulating EPCs can be induced in mild TBI. The expression of CXCR4+ in EPCs at 7 days after TBI reflects the short-term prognosis of brain injury, and could be a potential biological marker for prognosis prediction of mild TBI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".