MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393901538 · doi:10.1101/2024.03.27.586996

The Hyaluronan Synthase isoforms direct distinct patterns of fibroblast activation linked to fibrosis progression versus resolution following renal ischaemia

2024· preprint· en· W4393901538 on OpenAlexaff
I. V. Grigorieva, Adam C. Midgley, Charlotte Brown, Gilda Chevez, A. Williams, Dominic Manetta-Jones, Timothy Bowen, Deva D. Chan, Anna Plaas, Rafael Chevez, Robert Steadman, Usman Khalid, Soma Meran

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProteoglycans and glycosaminoglycans research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersHealth and Care Research WalesMedical Research CouncilUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsGene isoformFibroblastFibrosisIschemiaCell biologyMedicineCancer researchPathologyChemistryInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiologyBiochemistryGeneIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background The stroma plays a key role during renal development and in regeneration after injury. However, following injury, the stroma expands driving progressive fibrosis. Hyaluronan (HA) is a glycosaminoglycan that is absent in healthy kidney stroma but highly expressed in disease. To understand strategies to modulate stromal HA towards therapeutic advantage, this study compares HA and HA Synthase (HAS) enzyme expression in kidney development, health, disease, and recovery. Methods Rats underwent ischaemia reperfusion injury (IRI) with/without ischaemic preconditioning (IPC) and kidneys histologically analysed. Kidneys from C57BL/6 embryos and HAS1/3 -/- mice were also analysed and parallel mechanistic cell studies performed using primary human fibroblasts. Results In health, stromal HA was absent from the renal cortex. HAS1 was expressed in some epithelial cells, whilst HAS2 was not expressed. Following IRI there was increased stromal HA in areas of chronic fibrosis, alongside increased HAS2 (but not HAS1) expression. In contrast, during development prominent stromal HA matrices were evident in areas of tubular generation, with strong HAS1 (not HAS2) expression. Following IPC+IRI, stromal HA and HAS2 were attenuated; whilst HAS1 + cells expanded but were distinct from α-SMA + myofibroblasts. Cell studies demonstrated that HAS1 + fibroblasts had a functionally distinct phenotype, with enhanced migration and FAP expression but attenuated α-SMA, EDA-FN and COL1A1 expression, whereas HAS2 + fibroblasts demonstrated a classic α-SMA + contractile myofibroblast phenotype with high EDA-FN and COL1A1. Conclusions HA is a key regulator of stromal fibroblast heterogeneity, with HAS1 and HAS2 defining phenotypically distinct populations that may influence divergent renal outcomes following injury. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Hyaluronan (HA) is a matrix glycosaminoglycans that is absent in healthy kidney cortex but demonstrates increased expression in the renal stroma during progressive fibrosis. This study makes comparisons of HA accumulation, localisation, and HA Synthase (HAS) protein expression during kidney development, in health, following ischaemic kidney injury and during renal recovery. The study identifies that different HAS isoenzymes (HAS1 and HAS2) mediate distinct functional fibroblast phenotypes in vitro and are localised in distinct stromal localisations and cell sub-populations in vivo . The data provides interesting insights into HA dependent regulation of fibroblast stromal heterogeneity and identifies the novel finding that HAS1 defines cell populations that are associated with kidney recovery following ischaemic injury and are protective against progressive renal fibrosis.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicProteoglycans and glycosaminoglycans researchFrench-language works237,207