Evaluation of the therapeutic potential of carbonic anhydrase inhibitors in two animal models of dystrophin deficient muscular dystrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy is an inherited muscle degeneration disease for which there is still no efficient treatment. However, compounds active on the disease may already exist among approved drugs but are difficult to identify in the absence of cellular models. We used the Caenorhabditis elegans animal model to screen a collection of 1000 already approved compounds. Two of the most active hits obtained were methazolamide and dichlorphenamide, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors widely used in human therapy. In C. elegans, these drugs were shown to interact with CAH-4, a putative carbonic anhydrase. The therapeutic efficacy of these compounds was further validated in long-term experiments on mdx mice, the mouse model of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Mice were treated for 120 days with food containing methazolamide or dichlorphenamide at two doses each. Musculus tibialis anterior and diaphragm muscles were histologically analyzed and isometric muscle force was measured in M. extensor digitorum longus. Both substances increased the tetanic muscle force in the treated M. extensor digitorum longus muscle group, dichlorphenamide increased the force significantly by 30%, but both drugs failed to increase resistance of muscle fibres to eccentric contractions. Histological analysis revealed a reduction of centrally nucleated fibers in M. tibialis anterior and diaphragm in the treated groups. These studies further demonstrated that a C. elegans-based screen coupled with a mouse model validation strategy can lead to the identification of potential pharmacological agents for rare diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".