FPR-1 is an important regulator of neutrophil recruitment and a tissue-specific driver of pulmonary fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neutrophils are the most abundant inflammatory cells at the earliest stages of wound healing and play important roles in wound repair and fibrosis. Formyl peptide receptor 1 (FPR-1) is abundantly expressed on neutrophils and has been shown to regulate their function, yet the importance of FPR-1 in fibrosis remains ill defined. FPR-1-deficient (fpr1-/-) mice were protected from bleomycin-induced pulmonary fibrosis but developed renal and hepatic fibrosis normally. Mechanistically, we observed a failure to effectively recruit neutrophils to the lungs of fpr1-/- mice, whereas neutrophil recruitment was unaffected in the liver and kidney. Using an adoptive transfer model we demonstrated that the defect in neutrophil recruitment to the lung was intrinsic to the fpr1-/- neutrophils, as C57BL/6 neutrophils were recruited normally to the damaged lung in fpr1-/- mice. Finally, C57BL/6 mice in which neutrophils had been depleted were protected from pulmonary fibrosis. In conclusion, FPR-1 and FPR-1 ligands are required for effective neutrophil recruitment to the damaged lung. Failure to recruit neutrophils or depletion of neutrophils protects from pulmonary fibrosis.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".