MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117748007 · doi:10.1155/term/8367426

Recent Advancements in the Generation and Application of Therapeutic Cell Populations for Lung Epithelial Repair

2025· article· en· W7117748007 on OpenAlexaff
Muyang Zhou, Dana Brinson, Cindy Lei, Golnaz Karoubi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProgenitor cellStem cellLungInduced pluripotent stem cellRegenerative medicineEpitheliumEndogenyRespiratory epithelium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic respiratory diseases are a major global health concern. Lung epithelial dysfunction is a common underlying feature of many such conditions; hence, reconstructing the diseased epithelium with functional epithelial cells is a promising therapeutic approach. There are various endogenous stem cell and progenitor populations in the lung epithelium that can be utilized for transplantation. Additionally, pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) have emerged as a valuable source for generating therapeutic cells due to their capacity for indefinite self-renewal and the availability of directed differentiation protocols to transform them into lung progenitors or mature lung epithelial cells. This review discusses the endogenous stem cell and progenitor populations of the lung epithelium, recent advances in developing directed differentiation protocols to generate these cells, and the application of both endogenous and PSC-derived lung epithelial cells for disease modeling in vitro and as cell therapies in vivo. It provides valuable insights into the current progress of regenerative medicine within the respiratory field and highlights areas that require further research.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 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 venueJournal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207