Reactive Oxygen/Nitrogen Species and the Myocardial Cell Homeostasis: An Ambiguous Relationship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The totality of functional cardiomyocytes and an intact cardiac progenitor cell pool are key players in the myocardial cell homeostasis. Perturbation of either one may compromise the structural and functional integrity of the heart and lead to heart failure. Reactive oxygen/nitrogen species (ROS/RNS) are important regulators of cardiomyocyte viability; more recently, the interrelation between ROS and progenitor cell behavior and fate has moved into the spotlight. Increasing evidence suggests not only that ROS participate in the regulation of cardiac progenitor cell survival but also that they likewise affect their functional properties in terms of self-proliferation and differentiation. The apparent dichotomy of ROS/RNS effects with their adaptive and regulatory character on the one hand and their maladaptive and damaging features on the other pose a great challenge in view of the therapeutic exploitation of their role in the regulation of the myocardial cell homeostasis. In this article, mechanisms and potential significance of ROS/RNS action in the regulation of the myocardial cell homeostasis, in particular with respect to the preservation of viable cardiomyocytes and the maintenance of a functional cardiac progenitor cell pool, will be discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".