Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 68

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Role of Microglia and Peripheral Monocytes in Retinal Damage after Corneal Chemical Injury

Paschalis, Eleftherios I., Lei, Fengyang, Zhou, Chengxin, Kapoulea, Vassiliki, Thanos, Aristomenis, Dana, Reza, Vavvas, Demetrios G., Chodosh, James, Dohlman, Claes H.·2018·The American Journal of Pathology
DOI 10.1016/j.ajpath.2018.03.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Eyes that have experienced alkali burn to the surface are excessively susceptible to subsequent severe glaucoma and retinal ganglion cell loss, despite maximal efforts to prevent or slow down the disease. Recently, we have shown, in mice and rabbits, that such retinal damage is neither mediated by the alkali itself reaching the retina nor by intraocular pressure elevation. Rather, it is caused by the up-regulation of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), which rapidly diffuses posteriorly, causing retinal ganglion cell apoptosis and CD45+ cell activation. Herein, we investigated the involvement of peripheral blood monocytes and microglia in retinal damage. Using CX3CR1+/EGFP::CCR2+/RFP reporter mice and bone marrow chimeras, we show that peripheral CX3CR1+CD45hiCD11b+MHC-II+ monocytes infiltrate into the retina from the optic nerve at 24 hours after the burn and release further TNF-α. A secondary source of peripheral monocyte response originates from a rare population of patrolling myeloid CCR2+ cells of the retina that differentiate into CX3CR1+ macrophages within hours after the injury. As a result, CX3CR1+CD45loCD11b+ microglia become reactive at 7 days, causing further TNF-α release. Prompt TNF-α inhibition after corneal burn suppresses monocyte infiltration and microglia activation, and protects the retina. This study may prove relevant to other injuries of the central nervous system.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajpath.2018.03.005

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 68

Metadata

Authors
Paschalis, E. I., Lei, F., Zhou, C., Kapoulea, V., Thanos, A., Dana, R., Vavvas, D. G., Chodosh, J., & Dohlman, C. H.
ORCID
Paschalis, Eleftherios I.
Venue
The American Journal of Pathology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-07
Volume
188
Issue
7
Pages
1580-1596
ISSN
0002-9440
DOI
10.1016/j.ajpath.2018.03.005
Cited by
68
References
51
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • Massachusetts Eye and Ear
  • National Eye Institute (P30EY003790)
  • Massachusetts Lions Eye Research Fund
  • Research to Prevent Blindness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.