Angiogenic Sprouting Dynamics Mediated by Endothelial‐Fibroblast Interactions in Microfluidic Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Angiogenesis, the development of new blood vessels from existing vasculature, is a key process in normal development and pathophysiology. In vitro models are necessary for investigating mechanisms of angiogenesis and developing antiangiogenic therapies. Microfluidic cell culture models of angiogenesis are favored for their ability to recapitulate 3D tissue structures and control spatiotemporal aspects of the microenvironments. To capture the angiogenesis process, microfluidic models often include endothelial cells and a fibroblast component. However, the influence of fibroblast organization on resulting angiogenic behavior remains unclear. Here a comparative study of angiogenic sprouting on a microfluidic chip induced by fibroblasts in 2D monolayer, 3D dispersed, and 3D spheroid culture formats, is conducted. Vessel morphology and sprout distribution for each configuration are measured, and these observations are correlated with measurements of secreted factors and numerical simulations of diffusion gradients. The results demonstrate that angiogenic sprouting varies in response to fibroblast organization with correlating variations in secretory profile and secreted factor gradients across the microfluidic device. This study is anticipated to shed light on how sprouting dynamics are mediated by fibroblast configuration such that the microfluidic cell culture design process includes the selection of a fibroblast component where the effects are known and leveraged.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it