MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413530466 · doi:10.4414/smw.2005.11037

Proteinases as hormone-like signal messengers

2005· review· en· W2413530466 on OpenAlexaff
Morley D Hollenberg, Steeve Houle

Bibliographic record

VenueSwiss Medical Weekly · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceptorCell biologySignal transductionThrombinMedicineProteasesHormone receptorHormoneG protein-coupled receptorInflammationBiologyEnzymeEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiochemistryCancerPlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proteinases like thrombin and trypsin, long known for their ability to activate the coagulation cascade or to act as hormone-processing enzymes, are now recognised as hormone-like regulators of cell function. These serine proteinases activate cell signalling by triggering a novel four-member family of G-protein-coupled receptors, termed Proteinase-Activated Receptors (PARs). This review article summarises historically the discovery of PARs as well as their unique mechanism of activation and outlines a number of different pathophysiological settings in which PARs can act to regulate cell and tissue function. PARs can be seen to play a role in pathophysiological processes ranging from inflammation and pain to cardiovascular disease and cancer. Apart from activating PARs to cause their physiological effects in tissues, proteinases can also mediate cell signalling via a number of other mechanisms, including the activation of growth factor receptors, like the one for insulin. Therefore, this article also describes the non-PAR mechanisms whereby proteinases can have hormone-like actions in cells and tissues.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSwiss Medical WeeklySame topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsFrench-language works237,207