Vascular regenerative cells in cardiometabolic disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review will provide an overview of the recent literature linking the pathophysiology of cardiometabolic disease with the depletion and dysfunction of circulating vascular regenerative (VR) cell content. Moreover, we provide rationale for the use of VR cells as a biomarker for cardiovascular risk and the use of pharmacological agents to improve VR cell content. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies demonstrate the potential of VR cells as a biomarker of cardiovascular risk and as a therapeutic target. Notably, lipid-lowering agents, antihyperglycemic therapies such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, as well as exercise and weight loss, have all been found to improve VR cell content, providing mechanistic evidence supporting a role in mitigating adverse cardiovascular outcomes in people with cardiometabolic-based disease. SUMMARY: The importance of VR cells as a biomarker in assessing cardiovascular risk is becoming increasingly apparent. This review highlights recent literature supporting the accurate use of VR cell characterization to monitor the capacity for vessel repair and novel strategies to improve vessel health. Future research is required to validate and optimize these emerging approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".