A Maladaptive Role for EP4 Receptors in Podocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inhibition of p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase and cyclooxygenase-2 reduces albuminuria in models of chronic kidney disease marked by podocyte injury. Previously, we identified a feedback loop in podocytes whereby an in vitro surrogate for glomerular capillary pressure (i.e., mechanical stretch) along with prostaglandin E(2) stimulation of its EP4 receptor induced cyclooxygenase-2 in a p38-dependent manner. Here we asked whether stimulation of EP4 receptors would exacerbate glomerulopathies associated with enhanced glomerular capillary pressure. We generated mice with either podocyte-specific overexpression or depletion of the EP4 receptor (EP4(pod+) and EP4(pod-/-), respectively). Glomerular prostaglandin E(2)-stimulated cAMP levels were eightfold greater for EP4(pod+) mice compared with nontransgenic (non-TG) mice. In contrast, EP4 mRNA levels were >50% lower, and prostaglandin E(2)-induced cAMP synthesis was absent in podocytes isolated from EP4(pod-/-) mice. Non-TG and EP4(pod+) mice underwent 5/6 nephrectomy and exhibited similar increases in systolic BP (+25 mmHg) by 4 weeks compared with sham-operated controls. Two weeks after nephrectomy, the albumin-creatinine ratio of EP4(pod+) mice (3438 μg/mg) was significantly higher than that of non-TG mice (773 μg/mg; P < 0.0001). Consistent with more severe renal injury, the survival rate for nephrectomized EP4(pod+) mice was significantly lower than that for non-TG mice (14 versus 67%). In contrast, 6 weeks after nephrectomy, the albumin-creatinine ratio of EP4(pod-/-) mice (753 μg/mg) was significantly lower than that of non-TG mice (2516 μg/mg; P < 0.05). These findings suggest that prostaglandin E(2), acting via EP4 receptors contributes to podocyte injury and compromises the glomerular filtration barrier.
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".