The Ins and Outs of Clusterin: Its Role in Cancer, Eye Diseases and Wound Healing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clusterin (CLU) is a glycoprotein originally discovered in 1983 in ram testis fluid. Rapidly observed in other tissues, it was initially given various names based on its function in different tissues. In 1992, it was finally named CLU by consensus. Nearly omnipresent in human tissues, CLU is strongly expressed at fluid–tissue interfaces, including in the eye and in particular the cornea. Recent research has identified different forms of CLU, with the most prominent being a 75–80 kDa heterodimeric protein that is secreted. Another truncated version of CLU (55 kDa) is localized to the nucleus and exerts pro-apoptotic activities. CLU has been reported to be involved in various physiological processes such as sperm maturation, lipid transportation, complement inhibition and chaperone activity. CLU was also reported to exert important functions in tissue remodeling, cell–cell adhesion, cell–substratum interaction, cytoprotection, apoptotic cell death, cell proliferation and migration. Hence, this protein is sparking interest in tissue wound healing. Moreover, CLU gene expression is finely regulated by cytokines, growth factors and stress-inducing agents, leading to abnormally elevated levels of CLU in many states of cellular disturbance, including cancer and neurodegenerative conditions. In the eye, CLU expression has been reported as being severely increased in several pathologies, such as age-related macular degeneration and Fuch’s corneal dystrophy, while it is depleted in others, such as pathologic keratinization. Nevertheless, the precise role of CLU in the development of ocular pathologies has yet to be deciphered. The question of whether CLU expression is influenced by these disorders or contributes to them remains open. In this article, we review the actual knowledge about CLU at both the protein and gene expression level in wound healing, and explore the possibility that CLU is a key factor in cancer and eye diseases. Understanding the expression and regulation of CLU could lead to the development of novel therapeutics for promoting wound healing.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".