Nitrate tolerance does not increase production of peroxynitrite in the heart
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical studies have suggested that long-term nitrate treatment does not improve and may even worsen cardiovascular mortality, and the possible role of nitrate tolerance has been suspected. Nitrate tolerance has been recently shown to increase vascular superoxide and peroxynitrite production leading to vascular dysfunction. Nevertheless, nitrates exert direct cardiac effects independent from their vascular actions. Therefore, we investigated whether in vivo nitroglycerin treatment leading to vascular nitrate tolerance increases cardiac formation of nitric oxide (NO), reactive oxygen species, and peroxynitrite, thereby leading to cardiac dysfunction. Nitrate tolerance increased bioavailability of NO in the heart without increasing formation of reactive oxygen species. Despite elevated myocardial NO, neither cardiac markers of peroxynitrite formation nor cardiac mechanical function were affected by nitroglycerin treatment. However, serum free nitrotyrosine, a marker for systemic peroxynitrite formation, was significantly elevated in nitroglycerin-treated animals. This is the first demonstration that, although the systemic effects of nitroglycerin may be deleterious due to enhancement of extracardiac peroxynitrite formation, nitroglycerin does not result in oxidative damage in the heart.
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".