Multiple types of skeletal muscle atrophy involve a common program of changes in gene expression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Skeletal muscle atrophy is a debilitating response to starvation and many systemic diseases including diabetes, cancer, and renal failure. We had proposed that a common set of transcriptional adaptations underlie the loss of muscle mass in these different states. To test this hypothesis, we used cDNA microarrays to compare the changes in content of specific mRNAs in muscles atrophying from different causes. We compared muscles from fasted mice, from rats with cancer cachexia, streptozotocin‐induced diabetes mellitus, uremia induced by subtotal nephrectomy, and from pair‐fed control rats. Although the content of >90% of mRNAs did not change, including those for the myofibrillar apparatus, we found a common set of genes (termed atrogins) that were induced or suppressed in muscles in these four catabolic states. Among the strongly induced genes were many involved in protein degradation, including polyubiquitins, Ub fusion proteins, the Ub ligases atrogin‐1/MAFbx and MuRF‐1, multiple but not all subunits of the 20S proteasome and its 19S regulator, and cathepsin L. Many genes required for ATP production and late steps in glycolysis were down‐regulated, as were many transcripts for extracellular matrix proteins. Some genes not previously implicated in muscle atrophy were dramatically up‐regulated (lipin, metallothionein, AMP deaminase, RNA helicase‐related protein, TG interacting factor) and several growth‐related mRNAs were down‐regulated (P311, JUN, IGF‐1‐BP5). Thus, different types of muscle atrophy share a common transcriptional program that is activated in many systemic diseases.—Lecker, S. H., Jagoe, R. T., Gilbert, A., Gomes, M., Baracos, V., Bailey, J., Price, S. R., Mitch, W. E., Goldberg, A. L. Multiple types of skeletal muscle atrophy involve a common program of changes in gene expression.—Stewart H. Lecker, R. Thomas Jagoe, Alexander Gilbert, Marcelo Gomes, Vickie Baracos, James Bailey, S. Russ Price, William E. Mitch, Alfred L. Goldberg Multiple types of skeletal muscle atrophy involve a common program of changes in gene expression. FASEB J. 18, 39–51 (2004)
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 | 0.001 | 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".