Effects of probucol on changes of antioxidant enzymes in adriamycin-induced cardiomyopathy in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The clinical usefulness of doxorubicin (adriamycin, ADR) is restricted by the risk of developing congestive heart failure. Probucol has been reported to completely prevent ADR cardiomyopathy without interfering with its antitumor effects. The current study investigated the effects of ADR and probucol on antioxidant enzyme gene expression during adriamycin-induced cardiomyopathy in a rat model. METHODS: The mRNA abundance by Northern and immunoreactive protein levels by Western blotting of myocardial antioxidant enzymes, glutathione peroxidase (GSHPx), manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD) and catalase (CAT) were examined in relation to the enzyme activities in hemodynamically assessed control and treated animals. RESULTS: At 3 weeks post-treatment duration, ADR caused heart failure which was prevented by probucol. MnSOD mRNA abundance as well as protein levels were depressed by ADR treatment by 45% and 20%, respectively, and this change was prevented by probucol. However, the mRNA and protein levels of GSHPx and CAT were not significantly changed by ADR or probucol. ADR had no effect on SOD activity but this enzyme activity was increased by probucol and probucol plus ADR. GSHPx enzyme activity was decreased and oxidative stress as indicated by TBARS was increased by ADR and these changes were also modulated by probucol. CONCLUSION: An increase in oxidative stress, GSHPx inactivation and MnSOD downregulation during ADR cardiomyopathy were prevented by probucol treatment.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".