Isoprostane-induced airway hyperresponsiveness is dependent on internal Ca<sup>2+</sup> handling and Rho/ROCK signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously reported the ability of isoprostanes to induce airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR). In this study, we examined the signaling mechanisms underlying that phenomenon with the standard muscle bath technique. Responses to a threshold concentration of carbachol (CCh, 3 x 10(-9) M) were significantly augmented by pretreatment for 20 min with 8-isoprostaglandin E(2) (15-E(2t)-IsoP, 10(-6) M): this AHR was obliterated in tissues pretreated with the selective Rho kinase (ROCK) inhibitor Y-27632 added 20 min before isoprostane, but not by cyclopiazonic acid (CPA). Increasing the CCh concentration to 3 x 10(-8) M (still considerably less than the half-maximally effective concentration of CCh) evoked larger contractions that were also augmented significantly by 15-E(2t)-IsoP: this AHR was completely abolished in tissues pretreated with CPA as well as those pretreated with Y-27632. We noted, however, that Y-27632 and CPA profoundly effect baseline tone and the cholinergic response per se, which confounds the interpretation of the data summarized above. We therefore modified the protocol by using combinations of CCh and blocker (CPA, Y-27632, or nifedipine) that were equieffective. In this way, we found that AHR could not be demonstrated under conditions in which Rho/ROCK signaling or Ca(2+) release was abolished (by Y-27632 and CPA, respectively). Likewise, other autacoids that act through G protein-coupled receptors via Rho/ROCK and Ca(2+) release (serotonin, histamine) mimicked this effect of isoprostane, whereas bradykinin did not. We conclude that isoprostane-induced AHR is mediated in part through an action on Rho/ROCK signaling. This novel finding may contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying AHR and asthma.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".