Reactivation of cardiomyocyte cell cycle: A potential approach for myocardial regeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Regulation of cardiomyocyte cell cycle appears to be more complex in mammals compared to the lower vertebrates. Cardiomyocytes from the adult newt and zebrafish can proliferate in response to myocardial injury and regenerate the damaged area. In contrast, cardiomyocytes in the mammalian heart cease to proliferate soon after birth. This limits the ability of the mammalian heart to regenerate the damaged myocardium following heart disease. It is believed that increasing the number of myocytes in a diseased heart can decrease scar formation and improve myocardial function. To this end, reactivation of cell cycle in the surviving myocardium may have therapeutic value in the treatment of heart disease. Here we provide a summary of studies describing myocyte cell cycle activity during development and disease, mechanisms of cell cycle exit in the adult heart and genetic modulations affecting cardiomyocyte cell cycle activity. Further, we discuss the potential utility of myocyte cell cycle reactivation in cardiac regeneration as well as improvement of myocardial 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) | 0.002 | 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".