MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018387777 · doi:10.1002/jnr.23156

Guanosine protects against reperfusion injury in rat brains after ischemic stroke

2012· article· en· W2018387777 on OpenAlexafffund
Barry J. Connell, Patrizia Di Iorio, Iqbal Sayeed, Patrizia Ballerini, Monique C. Saleh, Patricia Giuliani, Tarek M. Saleh, Michel P. Rathbone, Caixin Su, Shucui Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHealth Sciences CentreMcMaster University Medical CentreUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsReactive oxygen speciesReperfusion injuryIn vivoIschemiaPharmacologyChemistryWestern blotMedicineInternal medicineBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After ischemic stroke, early thrombolytic therapy to reestablish tissue perfusion improves outcome but triggers a cascade of deleterious cellular and molecular events. Using a collaborative approach, our groups examined the effects of guanosine (Guo) in response to ischemic reperfusion injury in vitro and in vivo. In a transient middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) in rats, Guo significantly reduced infarct volume in a dose-dependent manner when given systemically either immediately before or 30 min, but not 60 min, after the onset of the 5.5-hr reperfusion period. In a separate experiment, Guo significantly reduced infarct volume after 24 hr of reperfusion when administered 5 min before reperfusion. Western blot analysis did not reveal any significant changes either in endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress proteins (GRP 78 and 94) or HSP 70 or in levels of m-calpain. In vitro oxygen and glucose deprivation (OGD) significantly increased production of both reactive oxygen species (ROS) and interleukin-8 (IL-8) in the primary astrocytes. Guo did not alter ROS or IL-8 production when given to the astrocytes before OGD. However, Guo when added to the cells prior to or 30 min after reperfusion significantly reduced IL-8 release but not ROS formation. Our study revealed a dose- and time-dependent protective effect of Guo on reperfusion injury in vitro and vivo. The mechanisms by which Guo exerts its effect are independent of unfolded proteins in ER or the level of intracellular calcium or ROS formation. However, the effect may be induced, at least partially, by inhibiting IL-8, a marker of reperfusion-triggered proinflammatory events.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience ResearchSame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207