PPAR-gamma activation is associated with reduced liver ischemia-reperfusion injury and altered tissue-resident macrophages polarization in a mouse model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: PPAR-gamma (γ) is highly expressed in macrophages and its activation affects their polarization. The effect of PPAR-γ activation on Kupffer cells (KCs) and liver ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) has not yet been evaluated. We investigated the effect of PPAR-γ activation on KC-polarization and IRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy percent (70%) liver ischemia was induced for 60mins. PPAR-γ-agonist or vehicle was administrated before reperfusion. PPAR-γ-antagonist was used to block PPAR-γ activation. Liver injury, necrosis, and apoptosis were assessed post-reperfusion. Flow-cytometry determined KC-phenotypes (pro-inflammatory Nitric Oxide +, anti-inflammatory CD206+ and anti-inflammatory IL-10+). RESULTS: Liver injury assessed by serum AST was significantly decreased in PPAR-γ-agonist versus control group at all time points post reperfusion (1hr: 3092±105 vs 4469±551; p = 0.042; 6hr: 7041±1160 vs 12193±1143; p = 0.015; 12hr: 5746±328 vs 8608±1259; p = 0.049). Furthermore, liver apoptosis measured by TUNEL-staining was significantly reduced in PPAR-γ-agonist versus control group post reperfusion (1hr:2.46±0.49 vs 6.90±0.85%;p = 0.001; 6hr:26.40±2.93 vs 50.13±8.29%; p = 0.048). H&E staining demonstrated less necrosis in PPAR-γ-agonist versus control group (24hr:26.66±4.78 vs 45.62±4.57%; p = 0.032). The percentage of pro-inflammatory NO+ KCs was significantly lower at all post reperfusion time points in the PPAR-γ-agonist versus control group (1hr:28.49±4.99 vs 53.54±9.15%; p = 0.040; 6hr:5.51±0.54 vs 31.12±9.58%; p = 0.009; 24hr:4.15±1.50 vs 17.10±4.77%; p = 0.043). In contrast, percentage of anti-inflammatory CD206+ KCs was significantly higher in PPAR-γ-agonist versus control group prior to IRI (8.62±0.96 vs 4.88 ±0.50%; p = 0.04). Administration of PPAR-γ-antagonist reversed the beneficial effects on AST, apoptosis, and pro-inflammatory NO+ KCs. CONCLUSION: PPAR-γ activation reduces IRI and decreases the pro-inflammatory NO+ Kupffer cells. PPAR-γ activation can become an important tool to improve outcomes in liver surgery through decreasing the pro-inflammatory phenotype of KCs and IRI.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".