Improvement of defective Cystic fibrosis airway epithelial repair after CFTR rescue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Airway damage and remodelling is an important component of the progression of lung cystic fibrosis (CF) pathology. Our histological analyses of bronchial tissues from CF patients revealed several ultrastructural anomalies, including epithelial desquamation and tissue remodelling. Although some areas were in the process of epithelial regeneration, the repair mechanisms seemed obviously insufficient in maintaining epithelial integrity in CF airways. Our aim was thus to study the CFTR function in airway repair processes. Wound‐healing assays were performed to study the early phase of epithelial repair, in particular cell migration, in human CF and non‐CF airway cells. Our experiments showed that airway cells from CF patients repaired slower than non‐CF cells. In addition, CFTR inhibition or silencing in non‐CF primary airway cell monolayers partially inhibited wound‐closure. Interestingly, wt‐CFTR transduction in CF airway cell lines or CFTR correction with VRT‐325 in CFBE‐ΔF508 cells and primary CF bronchial monolayers significantly improved wound‐healing. Altogether our results demonstrated that functional CFTR play a critical role in wound‐repair, and CFTR correction may represent a novel strategy to promote the airway repair processes in CF. Project funded by CFC (Cystic Fibrosis Canada).
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) | 0.001 | 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".