The Angiopoietin-Tie2 axis contributes to placental vascular disruption and adverse birth outcomes in malaria in pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Malaria during pregnancy is a major contributor to the global burden of adverse birth outcomes including fetal growth restriction, preterm birth, and fetal loss. Recent evidence supports a role for angiogenic dysregulation and perturbations to placental vascular development in the pathobiology of malaria in pregnancy. The Angiopoietin-Tie2 axis is critical for placental vascularization and remodeling. We hypothesized that disruption of this pathway would contribute to malaria-induced adverse birth outcomes. Methods Using samples from a previously conducted prospective cohort study of pregnant women in Malawi, we measured circulating levels of angiopoietin-1 (Angpt-1) and Angpt-2 by Luminex (n=1392). We used a preclinical model of malaria in pregnancy ( Plasmodium berghei ANKA [PbA] in pregnant BALB/c mice), genetic disruption of Angpt-1 ( Angpt1 +/− mice), and micro-CT analysis of placental vasculature to test the hypothesis that disruptions to the Angpt-Tie2 axis by malaria during pregnancy would result in aberrant placental vasculature and adverse birth outcomes. Findings Decreased circulating levels of Angpt-1 and an increased ratio of Angpt-2/Angpt-1 across pregnancy were associated with malaria in pregnancy. In the preclinical model, PbA infection recapitulated disruptions to the Angiopoietin-Tie2 axis resulting in reduced fetal growth and viability. Malaria decreased placental Angpt-1 and Tie2 expression and acted synergistically with reduced Angpt-1 in heterozygous dams ( Angpt1 +/− ), to worsen birth outcomes by impeding vascular remodeling required for placental function. Interpretation Collectively, these data support a mechanistic role for the Angpt-Tie2 axis in malaria in pregnancy, including a potential protective role for Angpt-1 in mitigating infection-associated adverse birth outcomes. Funding This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Canada Research Chair, and Toronto General Research Institute Postdoctoral Fellowship Award. The parent trial was supported by the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership and the Malaria in Pregnancy Consortium, which was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The funders had no role in design, analysis, or reporting of these studies.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".