Tissue-specific expression of PPAR mRNAs in diabetic rats and divergent effects of cilostazol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cilostazol and ligands of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) have been effectively used to alleviate diabetic complications, but the common and tissue-specific expression patterns of PPARs in different tissues in diabetic patients and those treated with cilostazol have not been reported. Here, we aimed to assess the effects of diabetes and cilostazol on mRNA expression of PPARalpha and PPARgamma in the aorta, renal cortex, and retina of diabetic rats treated with cilostazol for 8 weeks. PPARalpha mRNA expression showed uniform downregulation in all these tissues in diabetic rats, and this effect was reversed by cilostazol treatment. Surprisingly, PPARgamma mRNA expression was reduced in the renal cortex and retina, yet increased in the aorta of diabetic rats, although cilostazol still reversed these changes. Interestingly, cilostazol, a well-known phosphodiesterase 3 inhibitor and cAMP elevator, augmented cAMP content only in the aorta, but showed no significant effects in the renal cortex of diabetic rats. In conclusion, mRNA expression of PPARs is tissue-specific in diabetes and may be differently affected by cilostazol, possibly because of its tissue-specific effects on cAMP content.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".