MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413093974 · doi:10.1038/s41536-025-00425-y

Prx1+ progenitors give rise to new articular cartilage when conditions are permissive for endogenous regeneration

2025· article· en· W4413093974 on OpenAlexafffund
C.L. Jablonski, Dora Modrcin, John Cobb, Donna‐Marie McCafferty, Paul Salo, Roman Krawetz

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Regenerative Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaCalgary Foundation
KeywordsPermissiveRegeneration (biology)EndogenyProgenitor cellArticular cartilageCell biologyCartilageBiologyMedicineNeuroscienceStem cellAnatomyOsteoarthritisPathologyEndocrinologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is widely acknowledged that articular cartilage lacks the ability to regenerate. However, if such regeneration were possible, which cell type would generate new tissue? The p21 −/− mouse provides an excellent platform to explore this question, hence, we conducted lineage tracing on Paired related homeobox 1 (Prrx1/Prx1) cells post-injury to determine whether endogenous Prx1 + cells contribute to regenerated tissues post-injury. p21 −/− mice displayed enhanced endogenous cartilage regeneration, accompanied by notable differences in the number and kinetics of Prx1 + cells within and around the injury site. In p21 −/− mice, Prx1 + cells underwent chondrogenesis, ultimately contributing to the regenerated articular cartilage layer. These findings underscore the impact of tissue-resident cells on cartilage regeneration, albeit under abnormal conditions. If the conditions within the joint could be manipulated to favor such a regenerative environment, these endogenous cell types might be recruited to facilitate the formation of a new articular cartilage surface post-injury.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Regenerative MedicineSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207