MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Normal Aging Impairs Upregulation of the Beta-adrenergic but not the Alpha-Adrenergic Response: Aging and Adrenergic Upregulation

2006· article· en· W2072053298 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Madden, Wayne C. Levy, John R. Stratton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsDownregulation and upregulationAdrenergicAlpha (finance)BETA (programming language)Adrenergic receptorAlpha-1A adrenergic receptorEndocrinologyInternal medicineAdrenergic antagonistBeta-3 adrenergic receptorMedicineChemistryReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine if centrally reducing sympathetic tone with clonidine will reverse the downregulation in the alpha-adrenergic (alphaAR) and beta-adrenergic (betaAR) responses seen with normal aging. METHODS: Twelve rigorously screened young adult (mean age, 26 years) and 15 older adult (mean age, 69 years) subjects were studied before and after using the clonidine patch (TTS-2) for 2 weeks. betaAR (isoproterenol at 35 ng/kg/min) and alphaAR (phenylephrine at 1.0 microg/kg/min) were assessed using radionuclide measures of end diastolic, end systolic, and stroke volume indices, cardiac index, and ejection fraction. RESULTS: Clonidine reduced resting plasma norepinephrine and this reduction was greater in older subjects (-47 +/- 3 versus -26 +/- 6%, P = 0.001). After 2 weeks of clonidine patch, upregulation of the betaAR was significantly higher in young subjects for heart rate (+10.7 +/- 1.5 versus +4.6 +/- 1.5 bpm; P = 0.01). There was no significant age-associated difference in the upregulation of the alphaAR with clonidine for systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure or systemic vascular resistance. CONCLUSIONS: With aging, there is an impaired resensitization of the chronotropic betaAR response with central sympathetic downregulation that is not seen with the alphaAR.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular PharmacologySame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207