MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400952624 · doi:10.1161/atvb.44.suppl_1.3046

Abstract 3046: Macrophage-smooth Muscle Cell Interactions In Atherosclerotic Foam Cell Formation

2024· article· en· W4400952624 on OpenAlexaff
Pinhao Xiang, Sima Allahverdian, Teddy Chan, Carleena Ortega, Gordon A. Francis, Başak Şahin

Bibliographic record

VenueArteriosclerosis Thrombosis and Vascular Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoam cellMacrophageCellSmooth muscleCell biologyChemistryMedicinePathologyBiologyInternal medicineBiochemistryIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: A hallmark of atherosclerosis is uncontrolled uptake of atherogenic lipoproteins by artery wall cells that accumulate large amounts of cholesteryl esters (“foam cells”). While smooth muscle cells (SMCs) and macrophages are in close proximity in lesions and contribute to cholesterol accumulation, whether these cells influence each other’s tendency to form foam cells is not clearly established. Hypothesis: Direct and indirect interactions between SMCs and macrophages promote foam cell formation by both cell types. Method: Human vascular SMCs were seeded onto macrophages to mimic direct macrophage-SMC interactions (n=5). Alternatively, conditioned media generated from human macrophages or SMCs with or without lipoprotein exposure was incubated with the alternate cell type (n=3). Aggregated lipoproteins were added in both models to induce cellular cholesterol accumulation. Intracellular cholesterol was quantified to compare lipoprotein uptake in cocultures relative to monocultures. Crosstalk based on CellChat analysis using single-cell RNA sequencing data from human coronary samples was performed to identify potential factors responsible for foam cell development (n=3). One-way ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. Result: SMCs showed a 4-fold (+/-0.3, p=0.002) increase in cell cholesterol accumulation when in direct contact with macrophages and a 3-fold (+/- 0.3, p<0.0001) increase when exposed to the conditioned media from macrophage foam cells. In contrast, macrophages showed a 3-fold reduction (+/- 0.3, p=0.001) in intracellular cholesterol accumulation when in direct contact with SMCs and a 2-fold reduction (+/-0.2, p=0.0005) when exposed to SMC foam cell-conditioned media. CellChat analysis suggested macrophage foam cells but not macrophage non-foam cells promote SMC foam cell formation by secretion of inflammatory cytokines, and that SMCs promote macrophage foam cell formation by secretion of extracellular matrix components. Conclusion: Our study provides novel understanding of how macrophage-SMC interactions influence macrophage and SMC foam cell formation. Further studies will be presented examining the role of SMC extracellular matrix proteins and macrophage-secreted cytokines on foam cell formation.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.007

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 venueArteriosclerosis Thrombosis and Vascular BiologySame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207