MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Human CYP3A Expression under Hypertonic Stimuli In Vivo

2010· article· en· W2277689643 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew I Chuang, Mingdong Yang, Pooja Dalvi, Frank J. Gonzalez, Patricia A. Harper, Shinya Ito

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAldose Reductase and Taurine
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIn vivoTonicityCYP3AHypertonic salineMessenger RNAIn vitroChemistryEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyGeneMedicineBiochemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We previously showed that human CYP3A expression in vitro is under the transcriptional control mediated by NFAT5, which is a tonicity responsive transcriptional factor. Interestingly, hypertonicity increases CYP3A expression, while hypotonicity decreases it, suggesting constitutive regulation roles of the NFAT5‐CYP3A pathway. In contrast, mouse Cyp3a was unresponsive to ambient hypertonicity in vitro . In the present study, our objective was to show if human CYP3A expression can be induced by hypertonic stimuli in vivo . The humanized CYP3A4–3A7 transgenic mice were subjected to 4 cycles of 24h water deprivation every other day, or to a 7‐day high‐salt diet (8% salt content, HSD), that mimics the dehydration and hypertonic luminal content in the intestine, respectively. In the kidney of mice undergoing the cyclic dehydration, NFAT5‐regulated BGT1 mRNA was significantly increased compared to control (5.9±1.1 fold: M±SEM; p=0.003). Fold‐changes of the CYP3A4 and 3A7 were 2.5±0.5 (p=0.02) and 0.7±0.2 (p=0.13), respectively. In mice after HSD, fold‐induction of the duodenal BGT1, CYP3A4 and 3A7 expressions were 25.2±8.2 (p=0.02), 4.7±0.9 (p=0.01) and 2.0±0.3 (p=0.08), respectively. Our findings suggest that human CYP3A transcription is under the influence of ambient tonicity. Direct involvement of NFAT5 in vivo awaits further studies. CIHR supported

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicAldose Reductase and TaurineFrench-language works237,207