MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048680298 · doi:10.2147/jaa.s261271

<p>Action of 1,25(OH)<sub>2</sub>D<sub>3</sub> on Human Asthmatic Bronchial Fibroblasts: Implications for Airway Remodeling in Asthma</p>

2020· article· en· W3048680298 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Plesa, Mellissa Gaudet, Andrea Mogas, Ronald Olivenstein, Saba Al Heialy, Qutayba Hamid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asthma and Allergy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTumor necrosis factor alphaCalcitriol receptorMedicineTransforming growth factorFibrosisVitamin D and neurologyFibroblastEndocrinologyInternal medicineCancer researchImmunologyBiologyIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Airway fibroblasts are major contributors to the histopathological feature of airway remodeling in asthma by their implication in the cell invasiveness and profibrogenic secretory phenotype observed in subepithelial fibrosis. 1,25 Dihydroxy vitamin D 3 (1,25(OH) 2 D 3 ) is an important therapeutic agent that blocks many features of airway remodeling induced by profibrogenic mediators, such as transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF-β 1) or T helper type 1 inflammatory cytokines. Objective: We hypothesized that 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 opposes the TGF-β 1 or tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α)-Interleukin 1 beta (IL-1β) stimulation on airway fibroblast profibrogenic secretory phenotype observed in severe asthmatic patients. Our aim was to investigate the anti-fibrogenic effect of 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 in TGF-β 1 or TNF-α-IL-1β-stimulated human bronchial fibroblast cells (HBFCs) from severe asthmatic compared with non-asthmatic subjects. Patients and Methods: All experiments were performed on primary HBFCs from asthmatic (DHBFCs, n=4) and non-asthmatic subjects (NHBFCs, n=4). mRNA expression and protein quantification of key fibrogenic markers were analyzed by RT-qPCR and ELISA, comparing HBFCs from asthmatic and non-asthmatic subjects. Vitamin D receptor ( VDR ) mRNA expression and its functionality in HBFCs were assessed by RT-qPCR. HBFCs proliferation was assessed by flow cytometry using BrdU-FITC/7AAD bivariate staining, while HBFCs apoptosis by Annexin V-FITC/7AAD. Results: VDR is constitutively expressed in HBFCs and the addition of 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 significantly increased mRNA expression of CYP24A1 (a direct VDRs’ target gene) in both HBFCs groups. DHBFCs cultured in the presence of TGF-β 1 or TNF-α-IL-1β showed increased mRNA expression and protein secretion of fibrogenic markers when compared to NHBFCs. Additionally, we observed decreased mRNA expression of FN 1, LUM, BGN, MMP2, COL5A1, TIMP1 and CC-chemokines ( CCL2, CCL5 , CCL11) in response to 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 addition to the TGF-β 1 or TNF-α-IL-1β-stimulated HBFCs. Cell culture media obtained from TGF-β 1 or TNF-α-IL-1β-stimulated DHBFCs showed decreased protein secretion (fibronectin 1, lumican, MCP1, RANTES and eotaxin-1) in response to 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 when compared to NHBFCs. 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 inhibited proliferation in TGF-β 1-stimulated HBFCs through G0/G1 cell cycle arrest and these effects were not correlated with the induction of apoptosis. Conclusion: DHBFCs under TGF-β 1 or TNF-α-IL-1β stimulation showed higher fibrogenic capacity when compared to NHBFCs. 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 significantly blocked these effects and highlight 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 as a possible therapeutic target for severe asthma. Keywords: 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 , 1,25 dihydroxy vitamin D 3 or calcitriol, asthma airway remodeling, fibrogenic markers, human airway fibroblasts, cell proliferation, apoptosis

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Asthma and AllergySame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207