MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140697563 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn520

Transcriptional profiling of ion channel genes in Brugada syndrome and other right ventricular arrhythmogenic diseases

2008· article· en· W2140697563 on OpenAlexaff
Nathalie Gaborit, Thomas Wichter, András Varró, Viktória Szüts, Guillaume Lamirault, Lars Eckardt, Matthias Paul, Günter Breithardt, Eric Schulze‐Bahr, Denis Escande, Stanley Nattel, Sophie Demolombe

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsBrugada syndromeMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyProbandSudden cardiac deathVentricular tachycardiaRyanodine receptor 2RepolarizationGeneGeneticsMutationElectrophysiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Brugada syndrome is an inherited sudden-death arrhythmia syndrome. Na(+)-current dysfunction is central, but mutations in the SCN5A gene (encoding the cardiac Na(+)-channel Nav1.5) are present in only 20% of probands. This study addressed the possibility that Brugada patients display specific expression patterns for ion-channels regulating cardiac conduction, excitability, and repolarization. METHODS AND RESULTS: Transcriptional profiling was performed on right-ventricular endomyocardial biopsies from 10 unrelated Brugada probands, 11 non-diseased organ-donors, seven heart-transplant recipients, 10 with arrhythmogenic right-ventricular cardiomyopathy, and nine with idiopathic right-ventricular outflow-tract tachycardia. Brugada patients showed distinct clustering differences vs. the two control and two other ventricular-tachyarrhythmia groups, including 14 of 77 genes encoding important ion-channel/ion-transporter subunits. Nav1.5 and K(+)-channels Kv4.3 and Kir3.4 were more weakly expressed, whereas the Na(+)-channel Nav2.1 and the K(+)-channel TWIK1 were more strongly expressed, in Brugada syndrome. Differences were also seen in Ca(2+)-homeostasis transcripts, including stronger expression of RYR2 and NCX1. The molecular profile of Brugada patients with SCN5A mutations did not differ from Brugada patients without SCN5A mutations. CONCLUSION: Brugada patients exhibit a common ion-channel molecular expression signature, irrespective of the culprit gene. This finding has potentially important implications for our understanding of the pathophysiology of Brugada syndrome, with possible therapeutic and diagnostic consequences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207