MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transcriptomic Response of Airway Epithelium to Diesel Exhaust and Woodsmoke

2025· article· en· W4410274044 on OpenAlexaff
M.H. Ryu, Ryan D. Huff, K. D. Hardy, Xun Xi, T. Lo, Christopher F. Rider, Chris Carlsten, Emilia L. Lim

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTranscriptomeAirwayRespiratory epitheliumEpitheliumPathologyAnesthesiaBiologyGeneGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The airway epithelium plays a crucial role as a mucosal barrier against environmental challenges, including traffic-related air pollution and wildfire smoke – the two most common exposures in North America. By utilizing an in-vitro exposure cell culture model and transcriptomic analysis to assess the effects of diesel exhaust (DE; a model for traffic-related air pollution) and wood smoke (WS; a model for wildfires), we can gain a comprehensive understanding of the similarities and differences in how each exposure impacts the respiratory tract. Methods: Human bronchial epithelial cells (hBEC) were collected from six healthy never-smokers undergoing a research bronchoscopy. Cells were cultured, expanded, and differentiated at air-liquid interface (ALI) for >21 days. Differentiated hBECs were exposed to filtered air (control condition), diesel exhaust (diluted to PM2.5 = 300 μg/m3), or woodsmoke (diluted to PM2.5 = 300 μg/m3) for 2 hours using a CULTEX in-vitro exposure system. Twenty-four hours after each exposure, the cells were harvested for RNA sequencing. Total RNA was extracted, followed by PolyA mRNA enrichment, cDNA synthesis, and sequencing library generation. Paired-end 150bp Illumina NovaSeq sequencing targeting 50 million read-pairs per library was then performed. After preprocessing, we conducted differential gene expression and pathway analysis through the nf-core RNA-seq pipeline before conducting DESeq2 differential expression analysis and Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA). Results: Transcriptome analysis revealed 283 (Up:162; Down:121) differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in DE-exposed cells compared to FA exposure (false discovery rate (FDR) <0.05). In contrast, there were 83 (Up:24; Down:59) DEGs in WS-exposed cells compared to control. Both DE and WS exposures elicited changes in 18 common differentially expressed transcripts (Up:5; Down:13). GSEA analysis showed enrichment of 33 and 12 KEGG Pathways in the DE and WS exposed cells, respectively, based on DEGs. GSEA further revealed shared enriched pathways (including oxidative phosphorylation and chemical carcinogenesis) between the DE and WS-exposed cells. No significant differences in cytotoxicity (LDH assay) or barrier function (transepithelial electrical resistance) were observed when comparing the FA condition to the exposure groups. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the utility of a systems biology approach in uncovering distinct and shared transcriptional responses of bronchial epithelial cells to two extremely common environmental exposures. Given some public perception of WS as inconsequential, along with alternative assumptions that similar concentrations of DE and WS likely have indistinct effects, these findings highlight the importance of understanding the intricacies of complex pollution-induced changes in airway health.

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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207