In-Vitro High-Throughput Screening of Nutritional Supplements for the Development of a Novel Perfusate for Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung transplantation is a lifesaving intervention that is limited by low organ utilization. The use of ex-vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) for organ repair could increase lung utilization, but addressing metabolic demands during EVLP is required for these approaches. The goal of this study was to develop a nutrient supplemented perfusate. We hypothesized that adding nutrients to the conventional perfusate would improve cell function. Mathematical models estimated metabolic accumulation during EVLP, while cellular characteristics were evaluated in human pulmonary endothelial cells. Adding Travasol and Multi-12 to the standard EVLP perfusate improved cell function for 24 and 48 h respectively. The addition of l-alanine-l-glutamine (AQ) had the most protective effect as an individual supplement; however, the combination of AQ, glycine, and cysteine outperformed all experimental perfusates to support cell function. Our approach provides a novel screening platform to develop perfusates to extend EVLP for organ repair.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".