Cardiac protein kinases: the cardiomyocyte kinome and differential kinase expression in human failing hearts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Protein kinases are potential therapeutic targets for heart failure, but most studies of cardiac protein kinases derive from other systems, an approach that fails to account for specific kinases expressed in the heart and the contractile cardiomyocytes. We aimed to define the cardiomyocyte kinome (i.e. the protein kinases expressed in cardiomyocytes) and identify kinases with altered expression in human failing hearts. METHODS AND RESULTS: Expression profiling (Affymetrix microarrays) detected >400 protein kinase mRNAs in rat neonatal ventricular myocytes (NVMs) and/or adult ventricular myocytes (AVMs), 32 and 93 of which were significantly up-regulated or down-regulated (greater than two-fold), respectively, in AVMs. Data for AGC family members were validated by qPCR. Proteomics analysis identified >180 cardiomyocyte protein kinases, with high relative expression of mitogen-activated protein kinase cascades and other known cardiomyocyte kinases (e.g. CAMKs, cAMP-dependent protein kinase). Other kinases are poorly investigated (e.g. Slk, Stk24, Oxsr1). Expression of Akt1/2/3, BRaf, ERK1/2, Map2k1, Map3k8, Map4k4, MST1/3, p38-MAPK, PKCδ, Pkn2, Ripk1/2, Tnni3k, and Zak was confirmed by immunoblotting. Relative to total protein, Map3k8 and Tnni3k were up-regulated in AVMs vs. NVMs. Microarray data for human hearts demonstrated variation in kinome expression that may influence responses to kinase inhibitor therapies. Furthermore, some kinases were up-regulated (e.g. NRK, JAK2, STK38L) or down-regulated (e.g. MAP2K1, IRAK1, STK40) in human failing hearts. CONCLUSION: This characterization of the spectrum of kinases expressed in cardiomyocytes and the heart (cardiomyocyte and cardiac kinomes) identified novel kinases, some of which are differentially expressed in failing human hearts and could serve as potential therapeutic targets.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".