One of the Primary Functions of Tissue-Resident Pluripotent Pericytes Cells May Be to Regulate Normal Organ Growth and Maturation: Implications for Attempts to Repair Tissues Later in Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult mesenchymal stem cells were reported more than 30 years ago. Since then, their potential to repair and regenerate damaged or diseased tissues has been studied intensively in both preclinical models and human trials. Most of the need for such tissue repair/regeneration is in older populations, so much of the effort has been performed with autologous cells in older patients. However, success has been difficult to achieve. In the literature, it has been noted that such progenitor cells from younger individuals often behave with more vigorous activity and are functionally enhanced compared to those from older individuals or animals. In addition, cells with the characteristics of mesenchymal stem cells or pluripotent mesenchymal regulatory cells exist in nearly all tissues and organs as pericytes since fetal life. Such evidence raises the possibility that one of the primary roles of these organ-specific cells is to regulate organ growth and maturation, and then subsequently play a role in the maintenance of organ integrity. This review will discuss the evidence to support this concept and the implications of such a concept regarding the use of these progenitor cells for the repair and regeneration of tissues damaged by injury or disease later in life. For the latter, it may be necessary to return the organ-specific progenitor cells to the functional state that contributed to their effectiveness during growth and maturation rather than attempting to use them after alterations imposed during the aging process have been established and their function compromised.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".