Dose-dependant effects of ace-inhibition on the cardiovascular actions of human ?new pressor protein? (NPP) related to $beta;FXIIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The blood pressure, heart rate and catecholamine releasing effects of NPP are potentiated by ACE-inhibition with Captopril (CAP) (J Hypertens: 16: 311, 1998; Can J Cardiol 18:.1077-1086, 1093-1103, 2002. We therefore examined how NPP's actions are influenced by different doses of CAP. NPP was given (20 μL plasma equivalent) to anesthetized (Inactin) male, Wistar bioassay rats (250-350g) divided into 4 groups, each n=6. These were control (no CAP) & CAP at 0.33, 2.5, or 10 mg/kg, i.v. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures (SBP & DBP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded using a Maclab/8 PowerMac 7200 computer system and plasma samples taken to determine adrenaline (ADR), noradrenaline (NA) and dopamine (DA) in response to NPP before/after adminstering CAP. Increasing doses of CAP produced marked increments in most of the measured responses, especially HR & plasma ADR. The profound increases in ADR after CAP supports our findings that NPP somehow triggers the sympatho-adrenal system. We postulate that NPP's effects are mediated by peptides and that the potentiating effects of CAP may result from prolonged, intensified actions of peptide(s) preserved by ACE inhibition. Bradykinin is one such candidate mediator whose endogenous production can be related to FXII activation in the body but its postulated participation in a hypertensive effect requires explanation. NPP/βFXIIa may represent a new axis for blood pressure regulation that links coagulation FXII with the sympatho-adrenal system. Supported by HSFO grants NA3478, T4136 (See Table) Δ: peak increments over corresponding control baseline values after injecting NPP; Means ± SEM, p<0.05 vs. no CAP; p<0.05 vs. CAP 0.33; p<0.05 vs. CAP 2.5
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".