MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2272616248 · doi:10.1007/978-1-59259-879-3_8

Strategies of Conditional Gene Expression in Myocardium

2005· review· en· W2272616248 on OpenAlexaff
H Heine, Hon S. Leong, Fábio Rossi, Bruce M. McManus, Thomas J. Podor

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular medicine · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsProvidence Health CareCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgeneReporter geneGene expressionTransduction (biophysics)GeneGenetic enhancementBiologyGreen fluorescent proteinViral vectorBioluminescence imagingComputational biologyExpression vectorCell biologyMolecular biologyLuciferaseTransfectionGeneticsRecombinant DNABiophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of specialized reporter genes to monitor real-time, tissue-specific transgene expression in animal models offers an opportunity to circumvent current limitations associated with the establishment of transgenic mouse models. The Cre-loxP and the tetracycline (Tet)-inducible systems are useful methods of conditional gene expression that allow spatial (cell-type-specific) and temporal (inducer-dependent) control. Most often, the alpha-myosin heavy chain (alpha-MHC) promoter is used in these inducible systems to restrict expression of reporter genes and transgenes to the myocardium. An overview of each inducible system is described, along with suggested reporter genes for real-time, noninvasive imaging in the myocardium. Effective gene delivery of the inducible gene expression system is carried out by lentiviral vectors, which offer high transduction efficiency, long-term transgene expression, and low immunogenicity. This chapter outlines the packaging of myocardium-specific inducible expression systems into lentiviral vectors, in which a transgene and a reporter gene are transduced into cardiomyocytes. In doing so, transgene and reporter expression can be monitored/tracked with bioluminescence imaging (BLI) and positron emission tomography (PET).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.418 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations40
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular medicineSame topicVirus-based gene therapy researchFrench-language works237,207