Itaconate and citrate releasing polymer attenuates foreign body response in biofabricated cardiac patches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Application of cardiac patches to the heart surface can be undertaken to provide support and facilitate regeneration of the damaged cardiac tissue following ischemic injury. Biomaterial composition is an important consideration in the design of cardiac patch materials as it governs host response to ultimately prevent the undesirable fibrotic response. Here, we investigate a novel patch material, poly (itaconate-co-citrate-co-octanediol) (PICO), in the context of cardiac implantation. Citric acid (CA) and itaconic acid (ITA), the molecular components of PICO, provided a level of protection for cardiac cells during ischemic reperfusion injury in vitro. Biofabricated PICO patches were shown to degrade in accelerated and hydrolytic conditions, with CA and ITA being released upon degradation. Furthermore, the host response to PICO patches after implantation on rat epicardium in vivo was explored and compared to two biocompatible cardiac patch materials, poly (octamethylene (anhydride) citrate) (POMaC) and poly (ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA). PICO patches resulted in less macrophage infiltration and lower foreign body giant cell reaction compared to the other materials, with corresponding reduction in smooth muscle actin-positive vessel infiltration into the implant region. Overall, this work demonstrates that PICO patches release CA and ITA upon degradation, both of which demonstrate cardioprotective effects on cardiac cells after ischemic injury, and that PICO patches generate a reduced inflammatory response upon implantation to the heart compared to other materials, signifying promise for use in cardiac patch applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".