The Roles of Insulin-Like Growth Factors in Mesenchymal Stem Cell Niche
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many tissues contain adult mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), which may be used in tissue regeneration therapies. However, the MSC availability in most tissues is limited which demands expansion in vitro following isolation. Like many developing cells, the state of MSCs is affected by the surrounding microenvironment, and mimicking this natural microenvironment that supports multipotent or differentiated state in vivo is essential to understand for the successful use of MSC in regenerative therapies. Many researchers are, therefore, optimizing cell culture conditions in vitro by altering growth factors, extracellular matrices, chemicals, oxygen tension, and surrounding pH to enhance stem cells self-renewal or differentiation. Insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) system has been demonstrated to play an important role in stem cell biology to either promote proliferation and self-renewal or enhance differentiation onset and outcome, depending on the cell culture conditions. In this review, we will describe the importance of IGFs, IGF-1 and IGF-2, in development and in the MSC niche and how they affect the pluripotency or differentiation towards multiple lineages of the three germ layers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".