Genetically Increasing <i>Myoc</i> Expression Supports a Necessary Pathologic Role of Abnormal Proteins in Glaucoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the importance of MYOC for glaucoma, the protein's normal function(s) and the pathogenic mechanism(s) of MYOC mutations are not clear. Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) and glaucoma are sometimes induced by corticosteroids, and corticosteroid use can result in substantially increased MYOC expression. It has been suggested, therefore, that steroid-induced MYOC protein levels cause steroid-induced glaucoma and that protein level-increasing mutations in MYOC contribute to glaucoma not associated with steroid use. A causative role of elevated MYOC levels in steroid-induced glaucoma is controversial, however, and it is not clear if elevated MYOC levels can result in IOP elevation. To directly test if increased levels of MYOC can cause IOP elevation and glaucoma, we generated bacterial artificial chromosome transgenic mice that overexpress Myoc at a level similar to that induced by corticosteroid use. These mice do not develop elevated IOP or glaucoma. Our present findings, along with the absence of glaucoma in mice completely lacking MYOC, show that changing the level of MYOC is not pathogenic (from absent to approximately 15 times normal). These findings suggest that noncoding sequence variants are unlikely to influence glaucoma and that disease pathogenesis in primary open-angle glaucoma patients is dependent upon the expression of abnormal mutant proteins. This work does not support a causative role for increased MYOC levels or the MYOC gene in steroid-induced glaucoma.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".