Angiogenesis Dysregulation in Term Asphyxiated Newborns Treated with Hypothermia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neonatal encephalopathy following birth asphyxia is a major predictor of long-term neurological impairment. Therapeutic hypothermia is currently the standard of care to prevent brain injury in asphyxiated newborns but is not protective in all cases. More robust and versatile treatment options are needed. Angiogenesis is a demonstrated therapeutic target in adult stroke. However, no systematic study examines the expression of angiogenesis-related markers following birth asphyxia in human newborns. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the expression of angiogenesis-related protein markers in asphyxiated newborns developing and not developing brain injury compared to healthy control newborns. DESIGN/METHODS: Twelve asphyxiated newborns treated with hypothermia were prospectively enrolled; six developed eventual brain injury and six did not. Four healthy control newborns were also included. We used Rules-Based Medicine multi-analyte profiling and protein array technologies to study the plasma concentration of 49 angiogenesis-related proteins. Mean protein concentrations were compared between each group of newborns. RESULTS: Compared to healthy newborns, asphyxiated newborns not developing brain injury showed up-regulation of pro-angiogenic proteins, including fatty acid binding protein-4, glucose-6-phosphate isomerase, neuropilin-1, and receptor tyrosine-protein kinase erbB-3; this up-regulation was not evident in asphyxiated newborns eventually developing brain injury. Also, asphyxiated newborns developing brain injury showed a decreased expression of anti-angiogenic proteins, including insulin-growth factor binding proteins -1, -4, and -6, compared to healthy newborns. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that angiogenesis pathways are dysregulated following birth asphyxia and are putatively involved in brain injury pathology and recovery.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".