MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133117741

Myofibroblast differentiation of porcine cardiac valve interstitial cells

2008· dissertation· W7133117741 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mindy Pho

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2008
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchStrongCanada Research ChairsHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMyofibroblastImmunostainingPopulationCofilinActinDesminExtracellular matrixCellular differentiationContraction (grammar)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined myofibroblast differentiation in VICs from porcine aortic valves. In normal valves, cells positive for a-SMA were rare, but spatially abundant in sclerotic valves. Hoechst 33342 dye identified 0.5% of VICs that are side population cells, none stained for SMA. Upon culture, sorted side population cells generated ∼85% SMA positive cells, indicating that some myofibroblasts originate from a rare population. Formation of myofibroblast is observed after 5 days in culture on rigid substrate, in contrast to compliant substrate. Exogenous tensile force also significantly increased SMA expression in VICs. ICAT and mass spectrometry identified cofilin as being differentially expressed in myofibroblast. Knockdown of cofilin with siRNA inhibited collagen gel contraction and reduced myofibroblast differentiation. Compared to normal valves, diseased valves showed strong immunostaining for cofilin that co-localized with SMA. Thus, in VICs, cofilin is a marker for myofibroblasts that arise from a rare population of stem cells and require a rigid matrix for formation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies→French-language works237,207→