Review



cteph  (Cusabio)


Bioz Verified Symbol Cusabio is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol Cusabio manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 93

    Structured Review

    Cusabio cteph
    Cteph, supplied by Cusabio, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 2 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/cteph/product/Cusabio
    Average 93 stars, based on 2 article reviews
    cteph - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars

    Images



    Similar Products

    92
    ATCC cteph ecs
    (A) Schematic drawing depicting the analysis of <t>CTEPH‐ECs,</t> HPAECs, and HSaVECs. The panel was created with BioRender.com. (B) TMEM100 mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 20 biological replicates; ECs isolated from central PEA samples marked with “full” and distal PEA samples with “open” circles) compared to HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3–6 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in four independent experiments). (C and D) TMEM100 protein expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 – 3 independent experiments), and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). Quantitative analysis (C). Representative images (D). Expression of CD31/PECAM1 is shown to demonstrate EC marker expression. (E and F) Immunohistochemical detection of TMEM100 on cross‐sections through PEA specimens from patients with CTEPH ( n = 6 biological replicates) or PE ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments). Representative images (E). Quantitative analysis (F). Findings after omission of the first antibody (negative control) are also shown. ALK1 (G) and ALK5 (H) mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 12 and n = 8 biological replicates, respectively) versus HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). (I) TMEM100 mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), alone or in the presence of the ALK1 inhibitor K02288 (10 µM) or the ALK5 inhibitor SB431542 (10 µM). ALK1 (J) and ALK5 (K) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation, and TMEM100 siRNA transfection. ALK1 (L) and ALK5 (M) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments), alone or in the presence of an ALK5 (L) or ALK1 (M) inhibitor. Representative images (N) and quantitative analysis of the cumulative tube length (O) of CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 4 independent experiments) cultivated on Matrigel for 5 h and the effects of TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), control or TMEM100 siRNA transfection, ALK1, or ALK5 inhibition. Exact p values were determined using unpaired Student's t ‐test (F, L, and M), one‐way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparisons test (G, H, I, and O), or Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn's multiple comparisons test (B, C, J, and K), based on the Shapiro–Wilk test for normal distribution. Quantitative data are shown as mean ± SEM or median with interquartile range, depending on the presence of normal distribution or not. Scale bars in (D), (E), and (N) denote 100 µm. (P) Visual summary of the findings of the study. The panel was created with Inkscape v.1.4.2.
    Cteph Ecs, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 92/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/cteph ecs/product/ATCC
    Average 92 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cteph ecs - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    92/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Cusabio cteph
    (A) Schematic drawing depicting the analysis of <t>CTEPH‐ECs,</t> HPAECs, and HSaVECs. The panel was created with BioRender.com. (B) TMEM100 mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 20 biological replicates; ECs isolated from central PEA samples marked with “full” and distal PEA samples with “open” circles) compared to HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3–6 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in four independent experiments). (C and D) TMEM100 protein expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 – 3 independent experiments), and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). Quantitative analysis (C). Representative images (D). Expression of CD31/PECAM1 is shown to demonstrate EC marker expression. (E and F) Immunohistochemical detection of TMEM100 on cross‐sections through PEA specimens from patients with CTEPH ( n = 6 biological replicates) or PE ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments). Representative images (E). Quantitative analysis (F). Findings after omission of the first antibody (negative control) are also shown. ALK1 (G) and ALK5 (H) mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 12 and n = 8 biological replicates, respectively) versus HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). (I) TMEM100 mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), alone or in the presence of the ALK1 inhibitor K02288 (10 µM) or the ALK5 inhibitor SB431542 (10 µM). ALK1 (J) and ALK5 (K) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation, and TMEM100 siRNA transfection. ALK1 (L) and ALK5 (M) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments), alone or in the presence of an ALK5 (L) or ALK1 (M) inhibitor. Representative images (N) and quantitative analysis of the cumulative tube length (O) of CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 4 independent experiments) cultivated on Matrigel for 5 h and the effects of TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), control or TMEM100 siRNA transfection, ALK1, or ALK5 inhibition. Exact p values were determined using unpaired Student's t ‐test (F, L, and M), one‐way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparisons test (G, H, I, and O), or Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn's multiple comparisons test (B, C, J, and K), based on the Shapiro–Wilk test for normal distribution. Quantitative data are shown as mean ± SEM or median with interquartile range, depending on the presence of normal distribution or not. Scale bars in (D), (E), and (N) denote 100 µm. (P) Visual summary of the findings of the study. The panel was created with Inkscape v.1.4.2.
    Cteph, supplied by Cusabio, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/cteph/product/Cusabio
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cteph - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    National Reference Center for Legionella national reference center for cteph
    (A) Schematic drawing depicting the analysis of <t>CTEPH‐ECs,</t> HPAECs, and HSaVECs. The panel was created with BioRender.com. (B) TMEM100 mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 20 biological replicates; ECs isolated from central PEA samples marked with “full” and distal PEA samples with “open” circles) compared to HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3–6 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in four independent experiments). (C and D) TMEM100 protein expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 – 3 independent experiments), and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). Quantitative analysis (C). Representative images (D). Expression of CD31/PECAM1 is shown to demonstrate EC marker expression. (E and F) Immunohistochemical detection of TMEM100 on cross‐sections through PEA specimens from patients with CTEPH ( n = 6 biological replicates) or PE ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments). Representative images (E). Quantitative analysis (F). Findings after omission of the first antibody (negative control) are also shown. ALK1 (G) and ALK5 (H) mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 12 and n = 8 biological replicates, respectively) versus HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). (I) TMEM100 mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), alone or in the presence of the ALK1 inhibitor K02288 (10 µM) or the ALK5 inhibitor SB431542 (10 µM). ALK1 (J) and ALK5 (K) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation, and TMEM100 siRNA transfection. ALK1 (L) and ALK5 (M) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments), alone or in the presence of an ALK5 (L) or ALK1 (M) inhibitor. Representative images (N) and quantitative analysis of the cumulative tube length (O) of CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 4 independent experiments) cultivated on Matrigel for 5 h and the effects of TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), control or TMEM100 siRNA transfection, ALK1, or ALK5 inhibition. Exact p values were determined using unpaired Student's t ‐test (F, L, and M), one‐way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparisons test (G, H, I, and O), or Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn's multiple comparisons test (B, C, J, and K), based on the Shapiro–Wilk test for normal distribution. Quantitative data are shown as mean ± SEM or median with interquartile range, depending on the presence of normal distribution or not. Scale bars in (D), (E), and (N) denote 100 µm. (P) Visual summary of the findings of the study. The panel was created with Inkscape v.1.4.2.
    National Reference Center For Cteph, supplied by National Reference Center for Legionella, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/national reference center for cteph/product/National Reference Center for Legionella
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    national reference center for cteph - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    Boston Biomedical antibody therapeutic for cteph
    (A) Schematic drawing depicting the analysis of <t>CTEPH‐ECs,</t> HPAECs, and HSaVECs. The panel was created with BioRender.com. (B) TMEM100 mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 20 biological replicates; ECs isolated from central PEA samples marked with “full” and distal PEA samples with “open” circles) compared to HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3–6 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in four independent experiments). (C and D) TMEM100 protein expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 – 3 independent experiments), and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). Quantitative analysis (C). Representative images (D). Expression of CD31/PECAM1 is shown to demonstrate EC marker expression. (E and F) Immunohistochemical detection of TMEM100 on cross‐sections through PEA specimens from patients with CTEPH ( n = 6 biological replicates) or PE ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments). Representative images (E). Quantitative analysis (F). Findings after omission of the first antibody (negative control) are also shown. ALK1 (G) and ALK5 (H) mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 12 and n = 8 biological replicates, respectively) versus HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). (I) TMEM100 mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), alone or in the presence of the ALK1 inhibitor K02288 (10 µM) or the ALK5 inhibitor SB431542 (10 µM). ALK1 (J) and ALK5 (K) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation, and TMEM100 siRNA transfection. ALK1 (L) and ALK5 (M) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments), alone or in the presence of an ALK5 (L) or ALK1 (M) inhibitor. Representative images (N) and quantitative analysis of the cumulative tube length (O) of CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 4 independent experiments) cultivated on Matrigel for 5 h and the effects of TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), control or TMEM100 siRNA transfection, ALK1, or ALK5 inhibition. Exact p values were determined using unpaired Student's t ‐test (F, L, and M), one‐way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparisons test (G, H, I, and O), or Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn's multiple comparisons test (B, C, J, and K), based on the Shapiro–Wilk test for normal distribution. Quantitative data are shown as mean ± SEM or median with interquartile range, depending on the presence of normal distribution or not. Scale bars in (D), (E), and (N) denote 100 µm. (P) Visual summary of the findings of the study. The panel was created with Inkscape v.1.4.2.
    Antibody Therapeutic For Cteph, supplied by Boston Biomedical, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/antibody therapeutic for cteph/product/Boston Biomedical
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    antibody therapeutic for cteph - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    BARCO Inc composite outcome of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (cteph) or post-pe impairment
    (A) Schematic drawing depicting the analysis of <t>CTEPH‐ECs,</t> HPAECs, and HSaVECs. The panel was created with BioRender.com. (B) TMEM100 mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 20 biological replicates; ECs isolated from central PEA samples marked with “full” and distal PEA samples with “open” circles) compared to HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3–6 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in four independent experiments). (C and D) TMEM100 protein expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 – 3 independent experiments), and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). Quantitative analysis (C). Representative images (D). Expression of CD31/PECAM1 is shown to demonstrate EC marker expression. (E and F) Immunohistochemical detection of TMEM100 on cross‐sections through PEA specimens from patients with CTEPH ( n = 6 biological replicates) or PE ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments). Representative images (E). Quantitative analysis (F). Findings after omission of the first antibody (negative control) are also shown. ALK1 (G) and ALK5 (H) mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 12 and n = 8 biological replicates, respectively) versus HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). (I) TMEM100 mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), alone or in the presence of the ALK1 inhibitor K02288 (10 µM) or the ALK5 inhibitor SB431542 (10 µM). ALK1 (J) and ALK5 (K) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation, and TMEM100 siRNA transfection. ALK1 (L) and ALK5 (M) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments), alone or in the presence of an ALK5 (L) or ALK1 (M) inhibitor. Representative images (N) and quantitative analysis of the cumulative tube length (O) of CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 4 independent experiments) cultivated on Matrigel for 5 h and the effects of TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), control or TMEM100 siRNA transfection, ALK1, or ALK5 inhibition. Exact p values were determined using unpaired Student's t ‐test (F, L, and M), one‐way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparisons test (G, H, I, and O), or Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn's multiple comparisons test (B, C, J, and K), based on the Shapiro–Wilk test for normal distribution. Quantitative data are shown as mean ± SEM or median with interquartile range, depending on the presence of normal distribution or not. Scale bars in (D), (E), and (N) denote 100 µm. (P) Visual summary of the findings of the study. The panel was created with Inkscape v.1.4.2.
    Composite Outcome Of Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension (Cteph) Or Post Pe Impairment, supplied by BARCO Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/composite outcome of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (cteph) or post-pe impairment/product/BARCO Inc
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    composite outcome of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (cteph) or post-pe impairment - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    Optum Inc cteph algorithms
    Performance characteristics of code-based <t> CTEPH algorithms: </t> averages and ranges of sensitivity and PPV across Optum, CCAE and Medicare databases.
    Cteph Algorithms, supplied by Optum Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/cteph algorithms/product/Optum Inc
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cteph algorithms - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    National Reference Center for Legionella triple expertise in cteph
    Performance characteristics of code-based <t> CTEPH algorithms: </t> averages and ranges of sensitivity and PPV across Optum, CCAE and Medicare databases.
    Triple Expertise In Cteph, supplied by National Reference Center for Legionella, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/triple expertise in cteph/product/National Reference Center for Legionella
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    triple expertise in cteph - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Selleck Chemicals cteph
    Performance characteristics of code-based <t> CTEPH algorithms: </t> averages and ranges of sensitivity and PPV across Optum, CCAE and Medicare databases.
    Cteph, supplied by Selleck Chemicals, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/cteph/product/Selleck Chemicals
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cteph - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    Kerckhoff Laboratories consecutive patients diagnosed with cteph
    Performance characteristics of code-based <t> CTEPH algorithms: </t> averages and ranges of sensitivity and PPV across Optum, CCAE and Medicare databases.
    Consecutive Patients Diagnosed With Cteph, supplied by Kerckhoff Laboratories, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/consecutive patients diagnosed with cteph/product/Kerckhoff Laboratories
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    consecutive patients diagnosed with cteph - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    (A) Schematic drawing depicting the analysis of CTEPH‐ECs, HPAECs, and HSaVECs. The panel was created with BioRender.com. (B) TMEM100 mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 20 biological replicates; ECs isolated from central PEA samples marked with “full” and distal PEA samples with “open” circles) compared to HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3–6 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in four independent experiments). (C and D) TMEM100 protein expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 – 3 independent experiments), and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). Quantitative analysis (C). Representative images (D). Expression of CD31/PECAM1 is shown to demonstrate EC marker expression. (E and F) Immunohistochemical detection of TMEM100 on cross‐sections through PEA specimens from patients with CTEPH ( n = 6 biological replicates) or PE ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments). Representative images (E). Quantitative analysis (F). Findings after omission of the first antibody (negative control) are also shown. ALK1 (G) and ALK5 (H) mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 12 and n = 8 biological replicates, respectively) versus HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). (I) TMEM100 mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), alone or in the presence of the ALK1 inhibitor K02288 (10 µM) or the ALK5 inhibitor SB431542 (10 µM). ALK1 (J) and ALK5 (K) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation, and TMEM100 siRNA transfection. ALK1 (L) and ALK5 (M) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments), alone or in the presence of an ALK5 (L) or ALK1 (M) inhibitor. Representative images (N) and quantitative analysis of the cumulative tube length (O) of CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 4 independent experiments) cultivated on Matrigel for 5 h and the effects of TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), control or TMEM100 siRNA transfection, ALK1, or ALK5 inhibition. Exact p values were determined using unpaired Student's t ‐test (F, L, and M), one‐way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparisons test (G, H, I, and O), or Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn's multiple comparisons test (B, C, J, and K), based on the Shapiro–Wilk test for normal distribution. Quantitative data are shown as mean ± SEM or median with interquartile range, depending on the presence of normal distribution or not. Scale bars in (D), (E), and (N) denote 100 µm. (P) Visual summary of the findings of the study. The panel was created with Inkscape v.1.4.2.

    Journal: Pulmonary Circulation

    Article Title: Transmembrane Protein 100 Expression on Endothelial Cells Vascularizing Thrombi in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Modulates TGFβ1−ALK1 Signaling During Angiogenesis

    doi: 10.1002/pul2.70253

    Figure Lengend Snippet: (A) Schematic drawing depicting the analysis of CTEPH‐ECs, HPAECs, and HSaVECs. The panel was created with BioRender.com. (B) TMEM100 mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 20 biological replicates; ECs isolated from central PEA samples marked with “full” and distal PEA samples with “open” circles) compared to HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3–6 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in four independent experiments). (C and D) TMEM100 protein expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 – 3 independent experiments), and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). Quantitative analysis (C). Representative images (D). Expression of CD31/PECAM1 is shown to demonstrate EC marker expression. (E and F) Immunohistochemical detection of TMEM100 on cross‐sections through PEA specimens from patients with CTEPH ( n = 6 biological replicates) or PE ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments). Representative images (E). Quantitative analysis (F). Findings after omission of the first antibody (negative control) are also shown. ALK1 (G) and ALK5 (H) mRNA expression in CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 12 and n = 8 biological replicates, respectively) versus HPAECs ( n = 3 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments) and HSaVECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 5 independent experiments). (I) TMEM100 mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), alone or in the presence of the ALK1 inhibitor K02288 (10 µM) or the ALK5 inhibitor SB431542 (10 µM). ALK1 (J) and ALK5 (K) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 3 independent experiments), control or after TGFβ1 stimulation, and TMEM100 siRNA transfection. ALK1 (L) and ALK5 (M) mRNA expression in HPAECs ( n = 2 biological replicates examined in 2–3 independent experiments), alone or in the presence of an ALK5 (L) or ALK1 (M) inhibitor. Representative images (N) and quantitative analysis of the cumulative tube length (O) of CTEPH‐ECs ( n = 1 biological replicate examined in 4 independent experiments) cultivated on Matrigel for 5 h and the effects of TGFβ1 stimulation (10 ng/mL for 24 h), control or TMEM100 siRNA transfection, ALK1, or ALK5 inhibition. Exact p values were determined using unpaired Student's t ‐test (F, L, and M), one‐way ANOVA, Sidak's multiple comparisons test (G, H, I, and O), or Kruskal–Wallis, Dunn's multiple comparisons test (B, C, J, and K), based on the Shapiro–Wilk test for normal distribution. Quantitative data are shown as mean ± SEM or median with interquartile range, depending on the presence of normal distribution or not. Scale bars in (D), (E), and (N) denote 100 µm. (P) Visual summary of the findings of the study. The panel was created with Inkscape v.1.4.2.

    Article Snippet: CTEPH‐ECs (Passage 1; Ethics Approval AZ 199/15) were isolated from CTEPH PEA specimens, as described in Bochenek et al. [ ], and compared to human pulmonary arterial ECs (HPAECs; PromoCell, C‐12241, Lot Numbers 458Z016.13 and 482Z007.13; ATCC, PCS‐100‐022, Lot Number 59880292) and ECs from the human saphenous vein (HSaVECs; PromoCell, C‐12231, Lot Number 455Z015.1), a frequent origin of blood clots embolizing into the lungs.

    Techniques: Expressing, Isolation, Marker, Immunohistochemical staining, Negative Control, Control, Transfection, Inhibition

    Performance characteristics of code-based  CTEPH algorithms:  averages and ranges of sensitivity and PPV across Optum, CCAE and Medicare databases.

    Journal: Pulmonary Circulation

    Article Title: Evaluation of code-based algorithms to identify pulmonary arterial hypertension and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension patients in large administrative databases

    doi: 10.1177/2045894020961713

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Performance characteristics of code-based CTEPH algorithms: averages and ranges of sensitivity and PPV across Optum, CCAE and Medicare databases.

    Article Snippet: CTEPH algorithms: graphical presentation of average positive predictive value and average sensitivity across the three databases examined (Optum, CCAE and Medicare).

    Techniques:

    CTEPH algorithms: graphical presentation of average positive predictive value and average sensitivity across the three databases examined (Optum, CCAE and Medicare). Code-based algorithms including two components are shown as green dots, those based on three components as orange dots and those based on at least four components as red dots. CTEPH: chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension; Dx: diagnosis code; PAH: pulmonary arterial hypertension; PE: pulmonary embolism; PH: pulmonary hypertension; Rx: drug code; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

    Journal: Pulmonary Circulation

    Article Title: Evaluation of code-based algorithms to identify pulmonary arterial hypertension and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension patients in large administrative databases

    doi: 10.1177/2045894020961713

    Figure Lengend Snippet: CTEPH algorithms: graphical presentation of average positive predictive value and average sensitivity across the three databases examined (Optum, CCAE and Medicare). Code-based algorithms including two components are shown as green dots, those based on three components as orange dots and those based on at least four components as red dots. CTEPH: chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension; Dx: diagnosis code; PAH: pulmonary arterial hypertension; PE: pulmonary embolism; PH: pulmonary hypertension; Rx: drug code; VTE: venous thromboembolism.

    Article Snippet: CTEPH algorithms: graphical presentation of average positive predictive value and average sensitivity across the three databases examined (Optum, CCAE and Medicare).

    Techniques: Biomarker Discovery