MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143978315 · doi:10.1139/y05-067

Prophylactic effects of an N- and L-type Ca<sup>2+</sup> antagonist, cilnidipine, against cardiac hypertrophy and dysfunction in stroke-prone, spontaneously hypertensive rats

2005· article· en· W2143978315 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kumiko Takemori, Hiroyuki Ishida, Kensaku Dote, Kazuo Yamamoto

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Fibrosis and Remodeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaptoprilMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyMuscle hypertrophyACE inhibitorAntagonistAngiotensin IIBlood pressureAngiotensin-converting enzymeReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To clarify the beneficial effects of cilnidipine, an L- and N-type calcium channel blocker, which were clinically observed against diastolic dysfunction in hypertrophied hearts of hypertensive patients, we investigated the effects of cilnidipine on cardiac remodeling and enhanced gene expression in stroke-prone, spontaneously hypertensive rats in comparison with that of captopril, a well-known angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, at threshold doses with little blood pressure lowering effect. The expression of type III collagen and beta/alpha-myosin heavy chain as well as transforming growth factor-beta, and basic fibroblast growth factor were suppressed by both treatments, indicating the prevention or amelioration of cardiac dysfunction. Such beneficial effects were much more intense with cilnidipine treatment than in captopril. These results indicate that Ca2+ is a key factor in the pathogenesis of cardiac remodeling in hypertension. One possible beneficial effect of cilnidipine in the prevention of cardiac dysfunction may be due to the decreased amount of growth factors such as transforming growth factor-beta and basic fibroblast growth factor via direct action for Ca2+ influx and also via inhibition of local renin-angiotensin system in the myocardium.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicCardiac Fibrosis and RemodelingFrench-language works237,207