MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604097874 · doi:10.1002/jbt.21921

The ontogeny and population variability of human hepatic dihydronicotinamide riboside:quinone oxidoreductase (NQO2)

2017· article· en· W2604097874 on OpenAlexaff
Zoe Riches, Yuejian Liu, Jacob M. Berman, Gurinder Kaur Walia, Abby C. Collier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biochemical and Molecular Toxicology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRibosideCytosolBiologyPopulationChemistryEnzymeBiochemistryInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dihydronicotinamide riboside:quinone oxidoreductase (NQO2) is an enzyme that performs reduction reactions involved in antioxidant defense. We hypothesized that NQO2 hepatic drug clearance would develop in children over time, similar to NQO1. Using human liver cytosol (n = 117), the effects of age, sex, ethnicity, and weight on NQO2 expression and activity were probed. No significant correlations were observed. Biochemical activity of NQO2 was as high at birth as in adults (0.23 ± 0.04 nmol/min/mg protein, mean ± SEM, range 0-1.83). In contrast, modeled hepatic clearance through the NQO2 pathway was up to 10% of adult levels at birth, reaching predicted adult levels (0.3 ± 0.03 L/h) at 14 years of age. Comparisons between NQO1 and NQO2 in the same livers showed that neither protein (P = 0.32) nor activity (P = 0.23) correlated, confirming both orthologs are independently regulated. Because hepatic clearance through NQO2 does not mature until teenage years, compounds detoxified by this enzyme may be more deleterious in children.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biochemical and Molecular ToxicologySame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207