Vasorelaxant Effects of Pramanicin, an Anti-fungal Agent: Selective Action on Endothelial Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A newly discovered antifungal agent, pramanicin, within the therapeutically effective concentration range (4-100 microM), inhibits the tone of phenylephrine (PE)-precontracted dog carotid arterial rings in a concentration-dependent manner and leads to gradual development of relaxation. However, pramanicin had no effect on rings precontracted with 100 mM KCl or on endothelium-denuded rings. Thus, inhibition by pramanicin of PE-induced contraction was endothelium-dependent. Preincubation of 100 microM pramanicin with carotid arterial rings for 30 min did not significantly affect the concentration-contraction response to PE, but almost completely inhibited the endothelium-dependent relaxation response to subsequent addition of 3 microM carbachol or 100 microM pramanicin. This irreversible inhibition of endothelium-dependent relaxation, which is independent of extracellular Ca2+, suggests possible endothelial cell damage by pramanicin. Pretreatment of the endothelium-intact vascular rings with L-N(G)-nitro-arginine (100 microM) inhibited the relaxation of PE-precontracted rings induced by 3 microM carbachol or 100 microM pramanicin, suggesting that the generation of nitric oxide (NO) in endothelial cells mediates the slow vascular relaxation induced by pramanicin. We conclude that pramanicin has little direct effect on the contractility of smooth muscle cells, but causes an initial slow endothelium-dependent, NO-mediated vascular relaxation. This is followed by a cytotoxic effect on vascular endothelial cells, eventually resulting in the loss of vasorelaxant function.
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) | 0.001 | 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".