MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comparative Study With ING-006, Nintedanib, Nerandomilast and Bexotegrast Using the In Vivo CAM-Patient-Derived IPF Model

2025· article· en· W4410276892 on OpenAlexaff
Lyne Gagnon, Martine Charbonneau, Karine Brochu‐Gaudreau, Kelly Harper, Alexis Perreault, Pierre Laurin, Claire M. Dubois

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeBausch Health (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNintedanibIn vivoInternal medicineIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosisLungGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract RATIONALE: The chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM)-IPF model allows the culture of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) tissue or fibroblast xenografts with an engraftment success rate of over 90%. Immunohistochemical analysis shows that xenografts derived from fibroblasts mimic fibroblastic foci. In addition, the assay preserves the microenvironment and histopathological characteristics of IPF lung tissue xenografts and treatment response, providing a predictive model of antifibrotic drug efficacy. ING-006 is a novel oral GPR40 agonist/GPR84 antagonist with potent antifibrotic activity in lung and liver models. This study was designed to evaluate the antifibrotic activity of ING-006 compared to nintedanib, and drugs in late-stage clinical development, nerandomilast (BI-1015550) and bexotegrast (PLN-74809) in primary IPF-lung fibroblasts and an in vivo patient-derived CAM-IPF model. METHODS: TGFβ-stimulated primary lung fibroblasts from IPF patients were incubated in the presence or absence of antifibrotics and the expression of fibrotic genes (COL1A1, COL3A1, ACTA2 (α-SMA), CTGF, SERPINE1 and FN1) was evaluated. Fragments of fresh human IPF lung tissue were implanted and cultured on the CAM and treated with the antifibrotic compounds from day 2 to day 7 post-implantation. Xenografts were harvested for histological analysis an immunohistochemistry and qPCRS were performed.RESULTS: Antifibrotic compounds effectively reduced fibrotic gene expression (COL1A1, COL3A1, ACTA2, CTGF, SERPINE1 and FN1) in TGFβ-activated IPF fibroblasts, with ING-006 showing the highest efficacy, followed by bexotegrast and nerandomilast. ING-006 exerts its activity by acting through GPR84, as demonstrated by the lack of inhibition of CTGF expression in GPR84 knockdown fibroblasts. ING-006 also demonstrates superior inhibitory activity over fezagepras (formerly PBI-4050) in ZQ-16 stimulated-pErK lung fibroblasts as well as through inhibition of fibrotic gene expression. In CAM-IPF xenografts, where fibrosis is already implanted, a single low dose of ING-006 (10ug) induced a significant reduction in collagen area, while no significant antifibrotic activity was observed with nintedanib, nerandomilast or bexotegrast. In addition, when used in combination treatment, ING-006 showed synergistic activity with low dose nerandomilast (10ug) and additive activity with high dose bexotegrast (50ug).CONCLUSION: CAM-IPF is an efficient method to predict antifibrotic activity. Among other compounds currently used or under investigation for IPF treatment, ING-006 shows superior antifibrotic activity in fibroblasts and lung tissue xenografts from IPF patients, making it a promising candidate for IPF treatment.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207