Comparative Study of the Effects of Lacidipine and Enalapril on the Left Ventricular Cardiomyocyte Remodeling in Spontaneously Hypertensive Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antihypertensive medications are the most efficient drugs in achieving regression of myocardial hypertrophy in both clinical studies and animal models of hypertension. Nevertheless, there is a lack of clear and concise comparative study of their effects on the modulation of cardiomyocyte morphology and function. Here, we assessed the tissue-protective actions of 2 of these drugs, the calcium channel blocker lacidipine (3 mg/kg/day) and the angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitor enalapril (10 mg/kg/day) in vivo, after 8 weeks of treatment of 12-week-old spontaneously hypertensive rats, as well as in vitro, after short-term (4 min) application to isolated cardiomyocytes. Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) was compared at organ, tissue, and single-cell level. Our data showed that both drugs prevented the LVH of 20-week-old spontaneously hypertensive rats, but only lacidipine significantly decreased the cardiomyocyte size. Similarly, the single-cell contractility was significantly lowered in lacidipine-treated rats only. The effect of lacidipine was initiated shortly after exposure to the drug in a dose-dependent manner at 0.5 Hz, as well as at 2 Hz, with EC(50) of 10(-7) mol/L. These results can help in understanding the effects of these drugs on the prevention of LVH.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".