Role of inducible nitric oxide synthase in induction of RhoA expression in hearts from diabetic rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Recent studies from our laboratory demonstrated that increased expression of the small GTP-binding protein RhoA and activation of the RhoA/rho kinase (ROCK) pathway play an important role in the contractile dysfunction associated with diabetic cardiomyopathy in hearts from streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetic rats. Nitric oxide (NO) has been reported to be a positive regulator of RhoA expression in vascular smooth muscle, and we have previously found that the expression of inducible NO synthase (iNOS) is increased in hearts from STZ-diabetic rats. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the hypothesis that induction of iNOS positively regulates RhoA expression in diabetic rat hearts. METHODS AND RESULTS: To determine whether NO and iNOS could increase RhoA expression in the heart, cardiomyocytes from non-diabetic rats were cultured in the presence of the NO donor sodium nitroprusside (SNP) or lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in the absence and presence of the selective iNOS inhibitor, N(6)-(1-iminoethyl)-l-lysine dihydrochloride (L-NIL). In a second study, 1 week after induction of diabetes with STZ, rats were treated with L-NIL (3 mg/kg/day) for 8 more weeks to determine the effect of iNOS inhibition in vivo on RhoA expression and cardiac contractile function. Expression of iNOS was elevated in cardiomyocytes isolated from diabetic rat hearts. Both SNP and LPS increased RhoA expression in non-diabetic cardiomyocytes. The LPS-induced elevation in RhoA expression was accompanied by an increase in iNOS expression and prevented by L-NIL. Treatment of diabetic rats with L-NIL led to a significant improvement in left ventricular developed pressure and rates of contraction and relaxation concomitant with normalization of total cardiac nitrite levels, RhoA expression, and phosphorylation of the ROCK targets LIM (Lin-11, Isl-1, Mec-3) kinase and ezrin/radixin/moesin. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that iNOS is involved in the increased expression of RhoA in diabetic hearts and that one of the mechanisms by which iNOS inhibition improves cardiac function is by preventing the upregulation of RhoA and its availability for activation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".