Evaluation of Endocan as a Treatment for Acute Inflammatory Respiratory Failure
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
Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition resulting from acute pulmonary inflammation. However, no specific treatment for ARDS has yet been developed. Previous findings suggest that lung injuries related to ARDS could be regulated by endocan (Esm-1). The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential efficiency of endocan in the treatment of ARDS. Methods: We first compared the features of acute pulmonary inflammation and the severity of hypoxemia in a tracheal LPS-induced acute lung injury (ALI) model performed in knockout (Esm1−/−) and wild type (WT) littermate C57Bl/6 mice. Next, we assessed the effects of a continuous infusion of glycosylated murine endocan in our ALI model in Esm1−/− mice. Results: In our ALI model, we report higher alveolar leukocytes (p < 0.001), neutrophils (p < 0.001), and MPO (p < 0.001), and lower blood oxygenation (p < 0.001) in Esm1−/− mice compared to WT mice. Continuous delivery of glycosylated murine endocan after LPS-induced ALI resulted in decreased alveolar leukocytes (p = 0.012) and neutrophils (p = 0.012), higher blood oxygenation levels (p < 0.001), and reduced histological lung injury (p = 0.04), compared to mice treated with PBS. Conclusions: Endocan appears to be an effective treatment in an ARDS-like model in C57Bl/6 mice.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
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 it