ArticleScientific reports2025
Screening of hub genes and immunocytes related to tendon injury based on bioinformatics and machine learning models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrative bioinformatics and machine learning reveal hub genes and immune signatures bridging type 2 diabetes mellitus, fracture susceptibility, and osteoblast differentiation dysfunction.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2026Article
- Highly bio-adapted hydrogels for tendon-bone interface regeneration: Natural healing inspiration, design strategies, and biomedical potential.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tendon injury is a common and challenging clinical problem, and its healing process involves complex cellular and biological factors. Therefore, this study aims to reveal the mechanism of tendon healing and provide theoretical basis for clinical treatment. We first selected GSE26051 dataset from the GEO database and used R language to obtain 721 DEGs (459 up-regulated and 262 down-regulated). Subsequently, the 7378 genes of tendon injury obtained from the GeneCards database were intersected with DEGs to obtain 228 common genes. We constructed a PPI network of common genes using the STRING database, visualized it using Cytoscape software, and selected the top 10 (MYH6, MYL3, MYH1, MYH8, MYL1, TTN, TCAP, PKP2, ACTN2, CSRP3) genes through the CytoHubba plugin. We further identified hub genes (MYH1, MYH6, PKP2, MYH8) via machine learning models. Afterwards, the cytoskeleton in muscle cells and IL-17 signaling pathways were obtained by GO and KEGG analysis of common genes. Finally, the macrophages M2 was screened through immune infiltration analysis. This study revealed that hub genes such as MYH1, MYH6, MYH8 and PKP2 were mainly enriched in the cytoskeleton in muscle cells signaling pathway, and macrophage M2 played an important role in the inflammatory phase of tendon healing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.