The use of cell culture platforms to identify novel markers of bone and dentin resorption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: 1) To test the hypothesis that there would be proteomic differences in the composition of exosomes isolated from osteoclasts and odontoclasts and 2) to determine the clinical usefulness of these in vitro biomarker candidates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mouse bone marrow-derived precursors were cultured on either dentin or bone slices and allowed to mature and begin resorption. Exosomes were isolated from cell culture media and characterized by mass spectrometry. The proteomic data obtained from this in vitro study were compared with the data obtained from human samples in our previous work. RESULTS: There was a difference in the proteomic composition of exosomes from osteoclasts and odontoclasts. A total of 40 exosomal proteins were only present in osteoclast media, whereas six unique exosomal proteins were identified in odontoclast supernatants. Approximately 50% of exosomal proteins released by clastic cells in vitro can be found in oral fluids. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the mineralized matrix type plays a role in the final phenotypic characteristics of mouse clastic cells. Many in vitro biomarker candidates of bone and dentin resorption can also be found in human oral fluids, thus indicating that this approach may be a viable alternative in biomarker discovery.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".