MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992699677 · doi:10.2174/1568010023344689

Current and Future Therapeutic Strategies to Target Inflammation in Stroke

2002· review· en· W1992699677 on OpenAlexaff
B Stanimirović

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Drug Targets - Inflammation & Allergy · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflammationStroke (engine)MedicineNeuroscienceMicrogliaNeuroinflammationBioinformaticsImmunologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experimentally and clinically, stroke is followed by both acute and prolonged inflammatory responses characterized by the production of inflammatory cytokines and leukocyte infiltration into the brain. A debate on whether inflammation after stroke is neurotoxic or participates in brain repair remains unresolved. However, the need to pharmacologically control inflammatory amplification has been commonly acknowledged. The principal challenge of devising successful anti-inflammatory strategies for stroke is to understand molecular and temporal interplay of inflammatory and cell-death-inducing processes triggered by cerebral ischemia in both parenchymal and vascular brain cells. This article will review a number of experimental and clinically tested approaches to reduce brain inflammation and damage after stroke (e.g., anti-neutrophil, anti-ICAM-1, anti-cytokine strategies) and will suggest potential pathways where novel therapeutic targets may emerge, including transcriptional regulators of inflammatory gene expression (e.g., NF-kappaB, proteasome) and signaling pathways (e.g., ICE-cascade, MAPK/MKK/ERK cascade) linked to both inflammation and neuronal cell death. Finally, we will discuss applications of functional genomics technologies in the discovery of stroke diagnostics and therapies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations53
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Drug Targets - Inflammation & AllergySame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207