Biomimetic In Vitro Model of Cell Infiltration into Skin Scaffolds for Pre-Screening and Testing of Biomaterial-Based Therapies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to great clinical need, research where different biomaterials are tested as 3D scaffolds for skin tissue engineering has increased. In vitro studies use a cell suspension that is simply pipetted onto the material and cultured until the cells migrate and proliferate within the 3D scaffold, which does not mimic the in vivo reality. Our aim was to engineer a novel biomimetic in vitro model that mimics the natural cell infiltration process occurring in wound healing, thus offering a realistic approach when pre-screening and testing new skin substitutes. Our model consists of porous membrane cell culture inserts coated with gelatin and seeded with human dermal fibroblasts, inside which two different commercially available dermal substitutes were placed. Several features relevant to the wound healing process (matrix contraction, cell infiltration and proliferation, integration of the biomaterial with the surrounding tissue, and secretion of exogenous cytokines and growth factors) were evaluated. Our results showed that cells spontaneously infiltrate the materials and that our engineered model is able to induce and detect subtle differences between different biomaterials. The model allows for room for improvements or "adds-on" and miniaturization and can contribute to the development of functional and efficient skin substitutes for burns and chronic wounds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".