Exercise hemodynamic and neurohormone responses as sensitive biomarkers for diltiazem in rats.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the potential of exercise hemodyanamic and neurohormone variables as sensitive biomarkers for pre-clinical evaluation of diltiazem (DTZ). METHODS: Sprague Dawley (SD) rats were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 6 - 8 each), and each group received DTZ 10 mg/kg twice daily for 5 doses or saline followed by a treadmill exercise protocol for 7 min with speed set at 7 m/min at 3 % grade. The 3rd group received saline but no exercise. RESULTS: Exercise increased SBP from 108 +/- 2 to 131 +/- 3 mmHg, and HR from 437 +/- 6 to 503 +/- 6 bpm, and plasma epinephrine concentrations from 2.0 +/- 0.6 to 5.8 +/- 1.7 ng/mL in control rats (p < 0.05 for all variables), but had no significant effect on DBP (81 +/- 5 vs 87 +/- 6 mmHg) and plasma norepinephrine concentrations (1.5 +/- 0.2 vs 3.9 +/- 0.4 ng/mL). The hemodynamic responses to exercise were significantly attenuated by DTZ (p < 0.05), but the effect on neurohormone response was minimal (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Exercise hemodynamic and neurohormone responses are sensitive biomarkers which could be used for safety and efficacy evaluation of DTZ and perhaps also other calcium antagonists in pre-clinical animal models.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".