The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Regulation of Macrophage Polarization and Wound Healing
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Macrophages (Mφs) participate in wound healing by coordinating inflammatory and angiogenic processes. Mφs respond to environmental cues by adopting either "classically" activated (M1) proinflammatory or "alternatively" activated (M2a, M2b, M2c, M2d) wound healing phenotypes. THE PROBLEM: Mφ polarization is essential for wound healing and aberrations in this process are linked to several pathologies. It is important to elucidate molecular mechanisms underlying Mφ polarization. BASIC/CLINICAL SCIENCE ADVANCES: Mφs are categorized as proinflammatory (M1) or anti-inflammatory/wound healing (M2). M1 Mφs are observed in initial tissue damage responses, are induced by exogenous pathogen-associated molecular patterns or endogenous damage-associated molecular patterns, and exhibit increased phagocytosis and pro-inflammatory cytokine production, facilitating innate immunity and wound debridement. M2 Mφs predominate later in repair, express vascular endothelial growth factor, transforming growth factor beta, and interleukin 10 (IL-10), are activated by varied stimuli, assist in the resolution of inflammation, and promote tissue formation and remodeling. Recent work has characterized a novel "M2d" phenotype resulting from adenosine-dependent "switching" of M1 Mφs that exhibits a pattern of marker expression that is distinct from canonical IL-4/IL-13-dependent M2a Mφs. Recent studies have demonstrated important roles for specific transcriptional elements in M1 and M2a Mφ polarization, notably members of the interferon regulatory factor family interferon regulatory factor 5 (IRF5) and IRF4, respectively. The role of these IRFs in M2d polarization and wound healing remains to be determined. CLINICAL CARE RELEVANCE: Knowledge of microenvironmental signals and molecular mechanisms that mediate Mφ polarization should permit their manipulation to regulate important physiological processes and resolve pathological conditions. CONCLUSION: Proper Mφ polarization is essential to effective wound healing, and distinct phenotypes, such as the angiogenic M2d Mφ, may be of critical importance to this process. The IRF5 transcription factor has been shown to play a key role in M1 Mφ activation and the Jumonji domain containing-3-IRF4 pathway has been implicated in M2 Mφ activation.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cellular and molecular mechanisms of fibrosis
Wynn, T. (2008) · The Journal of Pathology · doi:10.1002/path.2277 · Cited by 4,495
Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Pain
Basbaum, A. I., Bautista, D. M., Scherrer, G., & Julius, D. (2009) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2009.09.028 · Cited by 4,344
Differential Roles of Macrophages in Diverse Phases of Skin Repair
Lucas, T., Waisman, A., Ranjan, R., Roes, J., Krieg, T., Müller, W., Roers, A., & Eming, S. A. (2010) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0903356 · Cited by 1,205 · cited 1×
“Likewise, this impaired healing was associated with the lack of the M2 cytokines TGF-b and VEGF, suggesting a role for M2 M/ polarization in this process.(19) These studies again strongly confirm the classical observations of Leibovich and Ross (1975) concerning the roles of M/s in wound repair.”
ResultSatoh, T., Takeuchi, O., Vandenbon, A., Yasuda, K., Tanaka, Y., Kumagai, Y., Miyake, T., Matsushita, K., Okazaki, T., Saitoh, T., et al. (2010) · Nature Immunology · doi:10.1038/ni.1920 · Cited by 1,156
Sindrilaru, A., Peters, T., Wieschalka, S., Baican, C., Baican, A., Peter, H., Hainzl, A., Schatz, S., Qi, Y., Schlecht, A., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci44490 · Cited by 1,100
De Santa, F., Totaro, M. G., Prosperini, E., Notarbartolo, S., Testa, G., & Natoli, G. (2007) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.08.019 · Cited by 965
Villalta, S. A., Rinaldi, C., Deng, B., Liu, G., Fedor, B., & Tidball, J. G. (2011) · Human Molecular Genetics · doi:10.1093/hmg/ddq523 · Cited by 299
Cited by
Understanding the Mysterious M2 Macrophage through Activation Markers and Effector Mechanisms
Rőszer, T. (2015) · Mediators of Inflammation · doi:10.1155/2015/816460 · Cited by 1,762
Platelet-Rich Plasma: New Performance Understandings and Therapeutic Considerations in 2020
(2020) · doi:10.3390/ijms21207794 · Cited by 1,039
Therapeutic strategies for enhancing angiogenesis in wound healing
Veith, A. P., Henderson, K., Spencer, A., Sligar, A. D., & Baker, A. B. (2019) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2018.09.010 · Cited by 1,021
Exosome‐Guided Phenotypic Switch of M1 to M2 Macrophages for Cutaneous Wound Healing
Kim, H., Wang, S. Y., Kwak, G., Yang, Y., Kwon, I. C., & Kim, S. H. (2019) · Advanced Science · doi:10.1002/advs.201900513 · Cited by 542
Schlundt, C., Fischer, H., Bucher, C. H., Rendenbach, C., Duda, G. N., & Schmidt-Bleek, K. (2021) · Acta Biomaterialia · doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2021.04.052 · Cited by 415
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferrante, C. J., & Leibovich, S. J.
- Venue
- Advances in Wound Care
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-02
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 10-16
- ISSN
- 2162-1918 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-1934
- OpenAlex
- W2110315161
- Cited by
- 603
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 12.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Regulation of Macrophage Polarization and Wound Healing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/wound.2011.0307
- The paper
- Ferrante, C. J., & Leibovich, S. J. (2012). Regulation of Macrophage Polarization and Wound Healing. Advances in Wound Care. https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2011.0307
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.