MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131344133 · doi:10.1161/atvb.39.suppl_1.634

Abstract 634: Hindlimb Mapping and Systematic Review of Angiogenesis Following Mouse Hindlimb Ischemia: New Insights Into Quality Assurance Imperatives

2019· article· en· W3131344133 on OpenAlexaff
Jason J. Lee, John‐Michael Arpino, Zengxuan Nong, J. Geoffrey Pickering, Hao Yin, Abdul Aziz Hashi, Jacqueline Chevalier, Caroline O’Neil

Bibliographic record

VenueArteriosclerosis Thrombosis and Vascular Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHindlimbAngiogenesisMedicineArteriogenesisIschemiaLimb ischemiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Induction of hindlimb ischemia in the mouse is a widely used preclinical model for skeletal muscle angiogenesis. However, there has been little success in translating results into benefit for patients with peripheral artery disease. This could reflect fundamental limitations in extracting data from the mouse model, recognizing the vast muscle territories and poorly defined heterogeneity in angiogenesis. To investigate data risks in this mouse model we: 1) mapped all muscle infarction/regeneration regions and all angiogenesis zones in the entire hindlimb; and 2) determined whether published studies to date have used an analysis strategy concordant with these findings. Methods and Results: Thirty-two muscles from each hindlimb of four, 12-week-old C57BL/6 mice were studied, 10 days following unilateral femoral artery excision. Infarction/regeneration maps were generated based on centralized myofiber nuclei. Angiogenesis zones were mapped based on CD-31 immuno-positive capillaries. Remarkably, only 15 of 32 muscles (47%) underwent infarction/regeneration. Furthermore, uniform muscle infarction was seen in only five of these injured muscles, all in the tibialis anterior bundle of muscles. Incomplete injury was evident in the gastrocnemius and adductor muscles. Angiogenesis was evident in zones of infarction/regeneration, but never in the non-infarcted muscles and rarely in infarct border-zones. Systematic review of mouse hindlimb angiogenesis studies identified 1,979 articles, with 160 meeting criteria for analysis. Of these reports only 15 (9%) evaluated angiogenesis in a tibialis anterior bundle muscle. Furthermore, only 39 (24%) studies consistently utilized central nuclei zones for angiogenesis assessment. Conclusions: There is extensive regional diversity in infarction/regeneration following mouse femoral artery excision, with angiogenesis observed exclusively in the infarction/regeneration zones. However, only a minority of published studies evaluated angiogenesis in the high-likelihood skeletal muscles or in regions of centralized myofiber nuclei. Developing quality assurance standards, based in part on these mapping data, could help translate mouse hindlimb ischemia studies to patient care.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.134
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.134
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0230.021
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArteriosclerosis Thrombosis and Vascular BiologySame topicAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerFrench-language works237,207