Ruslan Rust

A rare pre-existing progenitor-like Primed SMC compartment is the dominant inferred source of SMC-derived cellularity in vascular injury and atherosclerosis researchhub.com/paper/11337401…

Amazing work by @jdpereira and his lab! We'll have better science if all scientists share their work while doing it, instead of condensing it into a paper telling a "story" at the end. Beautiful organoids and a great preview on organoid patterning!

Socioeconomic and lifestyle factors predict the association between sleep health and depression researchhub.com/paper/11322922…

A Goldilocks zone of DNA flexibility defines stable yet plastic nucleosomes, tuned by histone chemistry researchhub.com/paper/11092594…

The science of human aging is flourishing, perhaps best exemplified by remarkable advances in organ and cellular clocks, tracked from proteins in the blood. These clocks tell us about the pace of aging within an individual and are linked to healthspan, longevity, and diseases. @wysscoray and I reviewed the field of biological clocks, published today @NatureMedicine free access rdcu.be/fsZ3h

@annemscheel Great feedback! We are preparing a revised version taking this into account ☺️ cc @HaoYin20

Looks like a cool analysis, but note that it excludes preprints that were never published. So this last sentence in the abstract amounts to ‘conditioning on preprints accepted by the scientific community, preprints are good enough to be accepted by the scientific community’.

Nature News covered our preprint on LLM analysis of Preprint-to-Publication transition😆👇 Think preprints are unreliable? Analysis of 70,000 studies might change your mind nature.com/articles/d4158… Kudos to @rust_ruslan for leading this project👍 biorxiv.org/content/10.648…

Today’s the day. Welcome to #CatalystNYC! We’re bringing together academics, funders, founders, and builders to reimagine how scientific discoveries get funded and turned into real-world impact. See you soon.

@Nature Thank you for the great interview and highlighting our research 🙏

Preprints don’t change much after peer review — and are rarely retracted. go.nature.com/3R05ZZj

My interview with @Nature on our recent work tracking how research claims change from preprint to publication on bioRxiv:

Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption Before Interhospital Transfer for Thrombectomy and Clinical Outcome neurology.org/doi/10.1212/WN…

Persistent and transient senescent cells contribute to brain-barrier development in @CellPressNews The highlights: - Distinct senescent states arise across brain-barrier cell lineages - Endothelial cells and macrophages engage a transient inflammatory senescent state - Choroid plexus epithelium maintains a persistent non-inflammatory senescent state - Senescent cell ablation alters vascular patterning and CSF homeostasis cell.com/cell/fulltext/…

Preprint link: biorxiv.org/content/10.648… web browser: rustlab1.github.io/neurovascular-…

Super excited to share a new work from our lab: Blood-brain barrier damage shows up as a common feature across many neurodegenerative diseases. But we still don't understand whether the underlying mechanism is shared or disease-specific at the neurovascular level. So we compared vessel-enriched human brain transcriptomes across Alzheimer's, frontotemporal dementia, and Huntington's to map what is shared and what is unique. Here are few highlights: 🔹 A partially conserved signature of vascular dysfunction runs across all three diseases, on top of disease-specific changes in endothelial, pericyte, and perivascular cells. 🔹 Endothelial remodeling was strongest in capillary and venous segments, pointing to segment-specific vulnerability along the arteriovenous axis. 🔹 We resolved the two human pericyte subtypes and found that matrix-type pericytes were consistently lost across every disease. 🔹 Endothelial-pericyte signaling was altered, with big shifts in ECM pathways (LAMININ, COLLAGEN, FN1, NCAM) and vascular signaling like NOTCH and VEGF. Together this positions BBB-associated pathways as a shared feature of neurodegeneration, and hopefully a useful resource for diagnostics and therapies down the line. Great collaborative work with Patrycja Forster and Oliver Bracko. @USC @KECKSchool_USC @ATRI_USC @KU_Leuven Preprint and an interactive web browser are in the comments!

I just funded: Same Pathway as MOTS-c. Cheaper. Safer. The Brain-Body Imaging Data Just Doesn't Exist Yet on ResearchHub! researchhub.com/proposal/32204…

If you want to share your thoughts and provide feedback, we uploaded now our preprint on @ResearchHub We pay $150 for a high quality review! Link: researchhub.com/paper/11329005…

How much does a scientific claim actually change between the preprint and the final published paper? We used a large language model to track it across all available 72,644 bioRxiv -> journal pairs from 2018 - 2025 in this new work with @HaoYin. 🧵

ResearchHub has been at the forefront of this movement 👏 We’re now seeing that the field is catching on to the logic of fairness to peer reviewers and their work @ResearchHub @ResearchHubF

@jdpereira @HaoYin20 Are you referring to the @qedScience score? :) would love to compare preprint vs published score on a subsample. Maybe a collab potential here @OdedRechavi ? 😀

@rust_ruslan @HaoYin20 … but did you score them? :D (Too soon?)

@venkmurthy Thank you! Really appreciate your feedback ☺️

Have to read this carefully But the upshot confirms my prior that peer review has a modest impact given the cost and time required

Takeaway: for most papers, the preprint is a reliable preview of the published version. Browse all 72,644 pairs: rustlab1.github.io/PreprintPaperT… Preprint: biorxiv.org/content/10.648… w/ @HaoYin20

Few limitations of our study: we compared claims at the abstract level, not full results, so subtler changes in the data or figures aren't captured. We also only see preprints that got published, and the LLM labels, while validated against experts, aren't perfect.

Does preprinting mean sloppier science with more retractions? We actually see quite the opposite: Preprinted papers were retracted about half as often as never-preprinted ones (8.1 vs 18.7 per 10,000). It's associational, but no sign that posting early lowers quality.