MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172986609 · doi:10.1667/rade-21-00017.1

The Intracerebroventricular Injection of Murine Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Engineered to Secrete Epidermal Growth Factor Does Not Prevent Loss of Neurogenesis in Irradiated Mice

2021· article· en· W3172986609 on OpenAlexafffund
Kerstin Killer, Oanh Lê, Christian Beauséjour

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeurogenesisDoublecortinSubventricular zoneDentate gyrusCell biologyHippocampusBiologyMesenchymal stem cellStromal cellSubgranular zoneEpidermal growth factorNeural stem cellStem cellImmunologyCancer researchEndocrinologyReceptorBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decreased neurogenesis after brain exposure to ionizing radiation is linked to neurocognitive impairments. Using transgenic mouse models, we previously showed that abrogation of radiation-induced senescence, or apoptosis, can partially rescue neurogenesis in the subventricular and hippocampus regions. Here, we evaluate whether the injection of recombinant epidermal growth factor (rEGF) or mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) engineered to secrete EGF (MSC-EGF) can preserve neurogenesis. Using doublecortin (Dcx) expression and BrdU incorporation assays, we found that the injection of rEGF into the subventricular zone (SVZ) promotes neurogenesis, despite increasing apoptosis, in the brain of irradiated mice. The effect of rEGF was mostly localized, as Dcx expression was not induced in the hippocampus region and limited in the contralateral SVZ. Surprisingly, the injection of bone marrow-derived MSC alone, or secreting EGF, did not result in increased neurogenesis despite the fact that part of the MSC survived a few weeks after injection. Our results suggest that only a supraphysiological concentration of rEGF can promote neurogenesis, likely through a direct mitogenic effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation ResearchSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207