MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2919852644 · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2019.00580

Mast Cells in Cardiac Fibrosis: New Insights Suggest Opportunities for Intervention

2019· review· en· W2919852644 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephanie Legere, Ian D. Haidl, Jean‐François Légaré, Jean S. Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Immunology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicMast cells and histamine
Canadian institutionsSaint John Regional HospitalDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchKillam TrustsDalhousie UniversityDalhousie Medical Research FoundationHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsFibrosisDegranulationChemokineInflammationImmune systemCardiac fibrosisPathogenesisReceptorInnate immune systemImmunologyBiologyCCL2MedicinePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mast cells (MC) are innate immune cells present in virtually all body tissues with key roles in allergic disease and host defense. MCs recognize damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) through expression of multiple receptors including Toll-like receptors and the IL-33 receptor ST2. MCs can be activated to degranulate and release pre-formed mediators, to synthesize and secrete cytokines and chemokines without degranulation, and/or to produce lipid mediators. MC numbers are generally increased at sites of fibrosis. They are potent, resident, effector cells producing mediators that regulate the fibrotic process. The nature of the secretory products produced by MCs depend on micro-environmental signals and can be both pro- and anti-fibrotic. MCs have been repeatedly implicated in the pathogenesis of cardiac fibrosis and in angiogenic responses in hypoxic tissues, but these findings are controversial. Several rodent studies have indicated a protective role for MCs. MC-deficient mice have been reported to have poorer outcomes after coronary artery ligation and increased cardiac function upon MC reconstitution. In contrast, MCs have also been implicated as key drivers of fibrosis. MC stabilization during a hypertensive rat model and an atrial fibrillation mouse model rescued associated fibrosis. Discrepancies in the literature could be related to problems with mouse models of MC deficiency. To further complicate the issue, mice generally have a much lower density of MCs in their cardiac tissue than humans, and as such comparing MC deficient and MC containing mouse models is not necessarily reflective of the role of MCs in human disease. In this review, we will evaluate the literature regarding the role of MCs in cardiac fibrosis with an emphasis on what is known about MC biology, in this context. MCs have been well-studied in allergic disease and multiple pharmacological tools are available to regulate their function. We will identify potential opportunities to manipulate human MC function and the impact of their mediators with a view to preventing or reducing harmful fibrosis. Important therapeutic opportunities could arise from increased understanding of the impact of such potent, resident immune cells, with the ability to profoundly alter long term fibrotic processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations90
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in ImmunologySame topicMast cells and histamineFrench-language works237,207