Regional Ion Channel Gene Expression Heterogeneity and Ventricular Fibrillation Dynamics in Human Hearts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Structural differences between ventricular regions may not be the sole determinant of local ventricular fibrillation (VF) dynamics and molecular remodeling may play a role. OBJECTIVES: To define regional ion channel expression in myopathic hearts compared to normal hearts, and correlate expression to regional VF dynamics. METHODS AND RESULTS: High throughput real-time RT-PCR was used to quantify the expression patterns of 84 ion-channel, calcium cycling, connexin and related gene transcripts from sites in the LV, septum, and RV in 8 patients undergoing transplantation. An additional eight non-diseased donor human hearts served as controls. To relate local ion channel expression change to VF dynamics localized VF mapping was performed on the explanted myopathic hearts right adjacent to sampled regions. Compared to non-diseased ventricles, significant differences (p<0.05) were identified in the expression of 23 genes in the myopathic LV and 32 genes in the myopathic RV. Within the myopathic hearts significant regional (LV vs septum vs RV) expression differences were observed for 13 subunits: Nav1.1, Cx43, Ca3.1, Cavα2δ2, Cavβ2, HCN2, Na/K ATPase-1, CASQ1, CASQ2, RYR2, Kir2.3, Kir3.4, SUR2 (p<0.05). In a subset of genes we demonstrated differences in protein expression between control and myopathic hearts, which were concordant with the mRNA expression profiles for these genes. Variability in the expression of Cx43, hERG, Na(+)/K(+) ATPase ß1 and Kir2.1 correlated to variability in local VF dynamics (p<0.001). To better understand the contribution of multiple ion channel changes on VF frequency, simulations of a human myocyte model were conducted. These simulations demonstrated the complex nature by which VF dynamics are regulated when multi-channel changes are occurring simultaneously, compared to known linear relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Ion channel expression profile in myopathic human hearts is significantly altered compared to normal hearts. Multi-channel ion changes influence VF dynamic in a complex manner not predicted by known single channel linear relationships.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".