Effect of celecoxib on the antihypertensive effect of losartan in a rat model of renovascular hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Certain nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have been reported to elevate blood pressure in some hypertensive patients, who are either untreated or treated with antihypertensive agents. This study was undertaken to determine the effect of a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, celecoxib, on the antihypertensive effects of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1) antagonist, losartan potassium. We studied the effect of oral treatment with losartan (30 mg/kg), celecoxib (3 mg/kg), and their combination on the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), plasma renin activity (PRA), and plasma prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) in male Sprague-Dawley rats with renovascular hypertension (RVH) induced by partial subdiaphragmatic aortic constriction. Treatment was continued for 7 days after aortic coarctation. Aortic coarctation led to significant increases in the MAP, PRA, and plasma PGE2. In RVH rats, losartan treatment caused a significant decrease of MAP with a significant increase in both plasma PGE2 and PRA. Celecoxib caused a nonsignificant change in MAP with a significant decrease in the raised levels of plasma PGE2 and PRA. Concomitant administration of celecoxib and losartan did not significantly affect the lowering effect of losartan on MAP with a subsequent significant decrease in the plasma PGE2 and PRA in RVH rats. Therefore, celecoxib could be used in renin-dependent hypertensive patients who receive losartan, without fear of a rise in their blood pressure.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".