MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4323350835 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.006

A6 PROTEASE-ACTIVATED RECEPTOR (PAR)-2 ACTIVATION ENHANCES EPITHELIAL WOUND HEALING MIGRATION THROUGH SRC AND RAC1 PATHWAYS

2023· article· en· W4323350835 on OpenAlexaff
Larissa Lucena Périco, Wallace K. MacNaughton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWound healingProto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase SrcCDC42RAC1Cell migrationPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayReceptorCell biologySignal transductionChemistryCancer researchBiologyImmunologyCellBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Protease-activated receptors (PARs) and their activating enzymes have been postulated to play a role in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) pathogenesis, but the specific roles of PAR2 in disease initiation and progression remain unclear. PAR2 activation has both pro-proliferative and pro-migratory effects and could be involved with the restoration of the epithelial barrier following injury. We previously showed that PAR2 activation increases epithelial wound healing through ERK, PI3K, and JNK pathways. However, the role of Src kinase and RhoGTPases, which PAR2 also activates, is not known. Purpose We hypothesized that PAR-2 activation induces wound healing in intestinal epithelial cells through Src and Rac1 activity. Method Circular wounds were made in T84 colonic epithelial cell monolayers. Wounded monolayers were treated with the PAR2 activating peptide, 2-furoyl-LIGRLO (2fLI, 5 μM), or the inactive control reverse-sequence peptide, 2-furoyl-OLRGIL (2fO, 5 μM), and live-cell imaging was used to record wound healing over a 24-hr period. Proliferation and apoptosis were measured using EdU and TUNEL assays, respectively. The mechanism of action was evaluated using inhibitors of Src (PP2), EGFR (PD153035), MLCK (ML-7), ROCK (Y-27632), Rac1 (NSC 23766), and Cdc42 (ML141), and western blot (WB) was used to confirm the protein levels of p-Src (Y416), p-ERK1/2, p-JNK, and p-PI3K. For immunofluorescence, images of E-cadherin and F-actin were taken to capture the entire wound border and surrounding cells. Result(s) PAR2 activation by 2fLI promoted wound healing compared to 2fO or vehicle control at the 24-hr time point (p<0.05). PAR2 activation had no effect on proliferation at the wound edge and did not affect apoptosis but did enhance lamellipodia/filopodia formation (p<0.001). These findings indicate that PAR2 reprograms the cells toward a migratory rather than a proliferative phenotype. When we investigated the mechanisms of action, the Src tyrosine kinase inhibitor, PP2, blocked PAR2-induced wound healing (p<0.0001). PAR2 activation increased Src phosphorylation (Y416, p<0.05) and the immunofluorescence showed a rise in actin cable formation at the wound edge and a reduction in lamellipodia/filopodia formation in the group treated with PP2 when compared to 2fLI (p<0.001). Although PAR2 activation increases the phosphorylation of ERK1/2 and JNK, this did not happen through Src. Furthermore, PAR2 did not increase the phosphorylation of PI3K as confirmed by WB analysis. Inhibition of EGFR (PD153035), MLCK (ML-7), ROCK (Y-27632), and Cdc42 (ML-141) did not alter PAR2-induced wound healing (p>0.05). In contrast, Rac1 inhibition by NSC23766 completely abrogated the PAR2-induced wound healing (p<0.05). Conclusion(s) PAR2 activation drives wound healing via Src tyrosine kinase and Rac1 activities. These findings provide a further mechanism whereby PAR2 can participate in the resolution of intestinal wounds in gastrointestinal inflammatory diseases. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→