5‐FU Weakens Defensive Functions of the Junctional Epithelium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigate additional factors contributing to the pathophysiology of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis and periodontitis beyond the systemic immune suppression caused by the chemotherapeutic agent 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU). METHODS: 5-Fluorouracil was topically delivered to the non-keratinized, rapidly proliferating junctional epithelium (JE) surrounding the dentition, and acts as an immunologic and functional barrier to bacterial ingression. Various techniques, including EdU incorporation, quantitative immunohistochemistry (qIHC), histology, enzymatic activity assays, and micro-computed tomographic (μCT) imaging, were employed to analyze the JE at multiple time points following topical 5-FU treatment. Systemic 5-FU delivery was used for comparison, and all 5-FU treated tissues were compared to vehicle-treated controls. RESULTS: We first showed that systemic 5-FU blocked mitotic activity that rapidly led to JE atrophy. This atrophy was accompanied by suppression of the immune system. We then demonstrated that topical 5-FU delivery effectively inhibited cell proliferation in the JE. Quantitative immunohistochemical (qIHC) analyses further demonstrated a progressive breakdown in JE barrier functions following topical 5-FU. CBC analyses confirmed that topical 5-FU did not alter the innate immune system but did suppress the local immune response of the JE. The longer-term consequences of this disruption in JE barrier functions were significant alveolar bone loss and an increase in porosity. Together, these results document the essential requirement for rapid JE cell proliferation to maintain homeostasis of the periodontium. CONCLUSIONS: The reduction of cell division in the JE due to 5-FU treatment directly compromises both its structural integrity and immune surveillance capabilities, contributing to the destruction of periodontal hard tissues.
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".