MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416807094 · doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2025.11.001

Glutaraldehyde-induced porcine model mimics human chronic wounds: insights into pathophysiology and therapeutic applications

2025· article· en· W4416807094 on OpenAlexaff
Shahriar Sharifi, Anthony McElwain, Negar Mahmoudi, David R. Nisbet, Valerie Johnson, Meisam Asgari, Hojatollah Vali, Simon Matoori, Jelena Marjanović, Marjana Tomic‐Canic, Irena Pastar, Lisa J. Gould, Paul Attar, Morteza Mahmoudi

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in biotechnology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsChronic woundPathophysiologyTranscriptomeExtracellular matrixHuman diseaseZebrafishAnimal modelAnimal studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic wounds present a significant clinical challenge due to their complex pathophysiology and resistance to standard treatments. A key obstacle in developing therapies is the lack of animal models that accurately mimic human chronic wound characteristics. Existing rodent models fail to replicate critical features, such as delayed re-epithelialization and unresolved inflammation, while larger animals, including porcine models, also fall short. Here, we introduce a novel glutaraldehyde-induced porcine model that mimics key aspects of human chronic wounds. Glutaraldehyde causes dermal toxicity, resulting in impaired structural integrity, oxidative stress, persistent inflammation, and bacterial colonization. Analyses showed features such as delayed healing, extracellular matrix (ECM) disruption, mitochondrial dysfunction, and chronic inflammatory responses. Comparative transcriptomic and lipidomic studies revealed shared signaling pathways and metabolite profiles with human venous leg and diabetic foot ulcers, highlighting the translational relevance of the model. This innovative platform offers valuable insights into chronic wound mechanisms and aids the development of effective targeted therapies.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in biotechnologySame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207