Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15642097›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2005

Wound healing and inflammation genes revealed by array analysis of 'macrophageless' PU.1 null mice.

Lisa Cooper, Claire Johnson, Frank Burslem, Paul Martin

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01750424 (3-D Imaging Assessment of Scar Formation and Would Healing in Fat Grafted vs Non-Fat Grafted Facial Reconstruction Wound Sites), which is not on this map. Cited by 63 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01750424 phase1 / phase2withdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2012, after this paper: background citation

3-D Imaging Assessment of Scar Formation and Would Healing in Fat Grafted vs Non-Fat Grafted Facial Reconstruction Wound Sites

TypeinterventionalSponsorYale UniversityRan2012 to 2012Enrolled0ConditionsScar Formation, Autologous Fat GraftingArmsAutologous Fat Grafting, No intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 135 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Plasticity of Epithelial Cells during Skin Wound Healing.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2023
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Role of Macrophages in Wound Healing.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lisa CooperDepartment of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. L.D.Cooper@bham.ac.uk <L.D.Cooper@bham.ac.uk>
Claire Johnson
Frank Burslem
Paul Martin
Pfizer (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWound healing is a complex process requiring the collaborative efforts of different tissues and cell lineages, and involving the coordinated interplay of several phases of proliferation, migration, matrix synthesis and contraction. Tissue damage also triggers a robust influx of inflammatory leukocytes to the wound site that play key roles in clearing the wound of invading microbes but also release signals that may be detrimental to repair and lead to fibrosis.

resultsTo better define key cellular events pivotal for tissue repair yet independent of inflammation we have used a microarray approach to determine a portfolio of over 1,000 genes expressed across the repair response in a wild-type neonatal mouse versus its PU.1 null sib. The PU.1 null mouse is genetically incapable of raising the standard inflammatory response, because it lacks macrophages and functioning neutrophils, yet repairs skin wounds rapidly and with reduced fibrosis. Conversely, by subtraction, we have determined genes that are either expressed by leukocytes, or upregulated by fibroblasts, endothelial cells, muscle cells and others at the wound site, as a consequence of inflammation. To determine the spatial expression pattern for several genes in each cluster we have also performed in situ hybridization studies.

conclusionsCluster analysis of genes expressed after wounding wild-type mice versus PU.1 null sibs distinguishes between tissue repair genes and genes associated with inflammation and its consequences. Our data reveal and classify several pools of genes, giving insight into their likely functions during repair and hinting at potential therapeutic targets.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingMacrophagesOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisAnimalsAnimals, NewbornCluster AnalysisContact InhibitionGenes, Immediate-EarlyInflammationIn Situ HybridizationLeukocytesMiceMice, KnockoutProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Protein Spi-1RNA, MessengerProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Protein Spi-1RNA, MessengerTrans-Activators

Identifiers

PMID15642097
PMCPMC549066
OpenAlexW2128517485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.