Understanding eNOS for Pharmacological Modulation of Endothelial Function: A Translational View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge about the function of endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS), and its regulation in pathophysiological states has tremendously increased. It is now clear that diminished activity of nitric oxide (NO) contributes to endothelial dysfunction, which is a characteristic of impeding atherosclerosis. This review aims to summarize the available knowledge about the impact of important cardiovascular risk factors on NO production by eNOS. There are 4 principle causes of diminished NO bio-activity: decreased expression and/or activity of the eNOS enzyme, eNOS uncoupling, enhanced breakdown or scavenging of NO and impaired transmission of NO-mediated signaling events (failure of the effector mechanisms). From the analysis, it becomes clear, that several aspects of eNOS functionality have only scarcely been tested under conditions of increased (experimental) cardiovascular risk. These aspects include palmitoylation, myristoylation and phosphorylation of the eNOS enzyme. Clear is that enhanced production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and eNOS uncoupling are relatively important causes of reduced NO-bioactivity in cardiovascular disease states. Ideally, eNOS is sufficiently expressed, produces NO sufficiently and not abundantly, does not produce superoxide and is not scavenged by ROS; the produced NO then reaches its signaling target, mainly soluble guanylyl cyclase (sGC) and elicits a cellular response. Considering which aspects of eNOS are now assessable in a clinical setting and which therapeutic measures are available, there is a great challenge ahead.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".