MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747271331 · doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000001917

Chronic Airway Fibrosis in Orthotopic Mouse Lung Transplantation Models—An Experimental Reappraisal

2017· article· en· W2747271331 on OpenAlexaff
Yoshito Yamada, Kevin Windirsch, Linus Dubs, David Kenkel, Jae–Hwi Jang, İlhan İnci, Andreas Boss, Tereza Martinu, Bart Vanaudenaerde, Walter Weder, Wolfgang Jungraithmayr

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsLung transplantationMedicineMinor histocompatibility antigenFibrosisImmunosuppressionTransplantationLungPathologyCystic fibrosisImmunologyMajor histocompatibility complexAntigenInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Several mouse lung transplantation (Tx) models have been proposed for the study of chronic airway fibrosis (CAF), the most prevalent complication seen in human lung transplant recipients, termed chronic lung allograft dysfunction. Alternatively, it has been called for to establish an experimental animal model for restrictive allograft syndrome, another phenotype of chronic lung allograft dysfunction. However, these mouse transplant models exhibit significant heterogeneity in consistency and reproducibility. We therefore aimed at reevaluating current available models. METHODS: Four different Tx combinations were used that manifest CAF: 2 minor antigen-mismatched Tx combinations (MINOR, donor: C57BL/10, recipient: C57BL/6J); or MINOR-N using recipient C57BL/6N, major histocompatibility antigen-mismatched immunosuppressed Tx (MAJOR, donor: BALB/c, recipient: C57BL/6J), and syngeneic Tx (donor and recipient: C57BL/6J) as control. The recipients were harvested and analyzed at week 8. Oxygenation, histology, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, and magnetic resonance imaging were performed to analyze outcome of those models. RESULTS: The most prominent manifestation of CAF, thickest subepithelial fibrotic changes, worst oxygenation, and the most severe acute rejection were detected in the MAJOR group compared with all other (P < 0.05). Gene expressions of TNF-α and TGF-β1 were higher, and IL-10 was lower in the MAJOR group. Immunohistochemistry found pleuroparenchymal fibrotic change in both the MAJOR and MINOR-J groups. CONCLUSIONS: We propose the major mismatch model under mild immunosuppression as the most suitable model for studying posttransplant CAF, and both the major and minor mismatch models for the restrictive phenotype.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.325 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207