Cited by 116

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Role of contact inhibition in the regulation of receptor-mediated uptake of low density lipoprotein in cultured vascular endothelial cells.

Vlodavsky, I, Fielding, P E, Fielding, C J, Gospodarowicz, D·1978·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Bovine vascular endothelial cells during logarithmic growth bind, internalize, and degrade low density lipoprotein (LDL) via a receptor-mediated pathway. However, contact-inhibited (confluent) monolayers bind but do not internalize LDL. This is in contrast to aortic smooth muscle cells or endothelial cells that have lost the property of contact inhibition. These cells internalize and degrade LDL at both high and low cell densities. The LDL receptors of smooth muscle and sparse endothelial cells down-regulate in response to LDL. In contrast, normal endothelial cells at confluency show little response. When contact inhibition in endothelial monolayers was locally released by wounding, and LDL was present, only cells released from contact inhibition accumulated LDL cholesterol. In smooth muscle cells under the same conditions, the entire culture interiorized lipid. It thus appears that in endothelial cells, unlike smooth muscle cells, contact inhibition is the major factor regulating cellular uptake of LDL cholesteryl ester. Reversal of contact inhibition by wounding provides a mechanism by which the endothelium could be the primary initiator of the atherosclerotic plaque.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.75.1.356

Cites

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. [6]Gospodarowicz, D., Greenburg, G., Bialecki, H. & Zetter, B., (1977) in Cellular Control of Proliferation, ed. Freed, C. In Vitro 13, in press.
  2. [5]Gospodarowicz, D., Moran, J., Braun, D. & Birdwell, C. (1976) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 73, 4120–4124.
  3. [18]Greep, R. O. (1966) Histology (McGraw Hill, New York), pp. 285-289.
  4. [20]Vasiliev, J. M., Gelfand, I. M., Domnina, L. V., Zacharova, O. S. & Ljubimov, A. V. (1975) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 72, 719– 722.
  5. [19]Schubert, D., Harris, A. J., Heinemann, S., Kidokoro, Y. & Patrick, J. (1973) in Tissue Culture of the Nervous System, ed. Sato, G. (Plenum Press, New York), p. 58.
  6. [21]Oliver, J. M., Ukena, T. E. & Berlin, R. D. (1974) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 71, 394–398.
  7. [23]Gospodarowicz, D., Vlodavsky, I. & Fielding, P. E. (1977) in International Congress of Birth Defects 5th, ed. Peereboom, T. (Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam), in press.
  8. [22]Raff, M. C. & De Petris, S. (1973) Fed. Proc. Fed. Am. Soc. Exp. Biol. 32, 48–54.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Vlodavsky, I., Fielding, P. E., Fielding, C. J., & Gospodarowicz, D.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1978-01
Volume
75
Issue
1
Pages
356-360
ISSN
  • 0027-8424
  • 1091-6490
Cited by
116
References
0
Language
en

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