MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986836517 · doi:10.1210/en.2008-1519

Absence of Nuclear Receptors for Oxysterols Liver X Receptor Induces Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome in Mice

2009· article· en· W1986836517 on OpenAlexaff
Kévin Mouzat, Fanny Volat, Silvère Baron, Georges Alves, Aurélien Pommier, David H. Volle, Geoffroy Marceau, Angélique DeHaze, Pierre Déchelotte, Raj Duggavathi, Françoise Caira, Jean‐Marc A. Lobaccaro

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrinology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndocrinologyInternal medicineReceptorOvarian hyperstimulation syndromeNuclear receptorOvaryBiologyMedicineChemistryEmbryoCell biologyIn vitro fertilisationBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is a frequent complication occurring during in vitro fertilization cycles. It is characterized by a massive ovarian enlargement associated with an accumulation of extra vascular fluid. Here we show that liver X receptor (LXR)-alpha and LXR-beta deficient mice present many clinical and biological signs of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: ovarian enlargement, hemorrhagic corpora lutea, increased ovarian vascular permeability, and elevated estradiol. Ovulation stimulation resulted in excessive ovarian response to exogenous gonadotropins because follicle number and estradiol production were higher in transgenic mice. LXR deficiency also leads to perturbations in general inflammatory status, associated with ovarian il-6 deregulation. Upon treatment with the synthetic LXR agonist T09101317, serum estradiol and expression of star and cyp11a1 genes were markedly increased in wild-type mice, showing that LXRs are key regulators of ovarian steroidogenesis. These results suggest that LXRs control the ovulation by regulating endocrine and vascular processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndocrinologySame topicCholesterol and Lipid MetabolismFrench-language works237,207