A novel mouse model of pulmonary fibrosis: twice-repeated oropharyngeal bleomycin administration mimicking human pathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive and irreversible lung disease with high mortality and limited treatment options. While single-dose bleomycin-induced models are commonly used to investigate the pathogenesis of IPF, they fail to adequately replicate the complex pathological features in human patients, thereby hindering comprehensive investigations. Previous studies utilizing repetitive bleomycin injections have demonstrated a closer resemblance to human IPF pathology; however, the time- and resource-intensive nature of this approach presents significant drawbacks. Here, we propose a novel methodology involving twice-repeated oropharyngeal administration of bleomycin in mice, which closely mirrors the pathological manifestations observed in IPF patients. This model exhibited the honeycomb-like cyst formation, fibroblastic foci, bronchiolization of alveolar epithelium, emergence of metaplastic alveolar KRT5+ basal cells, and sustainability of these fibrotic phenotypes, thereby providing a robust model for IPF. Our findings establish a more efficient and translatable preclinical platform for investigating IPF pathogenesis and exploring potential therapeutic strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".