MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788496190 · doi:10.1016/j.stemcr.2018.01.016

Modeling Human Cardiac Hypertrophy in Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes

2018· article· en· W2788496190 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ekaterina S. Ovchinnikova, Martijn F. Hoes, Kirill Ustyantsev, Nils Bömer, Tristan V. de Jong, Henny van der Mei, Eugène Berezikov, Peter van der Meer

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cell Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenHartstichtingAdvanced Foods and Materials Canada
KeywordsMechanotransductionMuscle hypertrophyBiologyEmbryonic stem cellCardiac hypertrophyStem cellCell biologyMyocyteInternal medicineNeuroscienceGeneEndocrinologyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac hypertrophy accompanies many forms of cardiovascular diseases. The mechanisms behind the development and regulation of cardiac hypertrophy in the human setting are poorly understood, which can be partially attributed to the lack of a human cardiomyocyte-based preclinical test system recapitulating features of diseased myocardium. The objective of our study is to determine whether human embryonic stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hESC-CMs) subjected to mechanical stretch can be used as an adequate in vitro model for studying molecular mechanisms of cardiac hypertrophy. We show that hESC-CMs subjected to cyclic stretch, which mimics mechanical overload, exhibit essential features of a hypertrophic state on structural, functional, and gene expression levels. The presented hESC-CM stretch approach provides insight into molecular mechanisms behind mechanotransduction and cardiac hypertrophy and lays groundwork for the development of pharmacological approaches as well as for discovering potential circulating biomarkers of cardiac dysfunction.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations77
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStem Cell ReportsSame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207