Role of angiotensin II receptor subtype activation in cognitive function and ischaemic brain damage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that angiotensin II type 1 (AT 1 ) receptor blockers (ARBs) reduce the onset of stroke, stroke severity and the incidence and progression of Alzheimer's disease and dementia. We can expect that ARBs exert these effects by both AT 1 receptor blockade and angiotensin II type 2 (AT 2 ) receptor stimulation. Moreover, recent experimental results support the notion that AT 2 receptor stimulation with AT 1 receptor blockade could contribute to protection against ischaemic brain damage at least partly due to an increase in cerebral blood flow and decrease in oxidative stress, and prevent cognitive decline. Cellular therapy has been focused on as a new therapeutic approach to restore injured neurons. In this context, it has been reported that AT 2 receptor stimulation enhances neurite outgrowth and decreases neural damage, thereby enhancing neurogenesis. Moreover, additional beneficial effects of ARBs with an AT 1 receptor blocking action with a partial peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor (PPAR)‐γ agonistic effect have been reported, and interaction of AT 2 receptor activation and PPAR‐γ might be involved in these ARBs' effects. This article reviews the effects of regulation of activation of angiotensin II receptor subtypes on ischaemic brain damage and cognitive function, focusing on the effects of AT 2 receptor stimulation. LINKED ARTICLES This article is one of a set of reviews submitted to BJP in connection with talks given at the September 2010 meeting of the International Society of Hypertension in Vancouver, Canada. To view the other articles in this collection visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1476‐5381.2011.01235.x , http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1476‐5381.2011.01260.x and http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1476‐5381.2011.01366.x
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".