MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411920721 · doi:10.1038/s44325-025-00072-8

Distinct endothelial cells in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

2025· article· en· W4411920721 on OpenAlexafffund
H. S. Jeffrey Man, Yidan Zhao, Usman Asghar, Licun Wu, Jonathan Yeung, John Granton, Marc de Perrot

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Cardiovascular Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkSinai Health SystemToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity Health Network Foundation
KeywordsChronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertensionMedicinePulmonary hypertensionCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a life-threatening condition characterized by unresolved thrombi obstructing the pulmonary arteries. Endothelial cells (ECs) are essential regulators of thrombosis and thrombus resolution, yet their molecular phenotypes in CTEPH are incompletely understood. Using single-cell RNA sequencing of CTEPH surgical specimens and control ECs from the Human Lung Cell Atlas, we uncover marked EC heterogeneity in CTEPH. Compared to controls, CTEPH ECs display marked phenotypic shifts, with the loss and emergence of distinct EC subpopulations, including a unique subset co-expressing pulmonary and bronchial EC markers. Our analysis reveals perturbed endothelial thrombosis regulation, encompassing coagulation, fibrinolysis, inflammation, TGF-β signaling, and angiogenesis, while identifying novel target genes. These findings provide a comprehensive view of endothelial contributions to delayed thrombus resolution, offering new insights into the pathophysiology of CTEPH and potential therapeutic targets.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Cardiovascular HealthSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207