MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795399486 · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2018.00028

LncRNAs: Proverbial Genomic “Junk” or Key Epigenetic Regulators During Cardiac Fibrosis in Diabetes?

2018· article· en· W2795399486 on OpenAlexafffund
Saumik Biswas, Anu Thomas, Subrata Chakrabarti

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Diabetes AssociationHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsEpigeneticsHistoneCardiac fibrosisDNA methylationBiologymicroRNACrosstalkComputational biologyMALAT1Context (archaeology)BioinformaticsGeneticsFibrosisLong non-coding RNAMedicineRNAGeneGene expressionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are critical regulators in a multitude of biological processes. Recent evidences demonstrate potential pathogenetic implications of lncRNAs in diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM); however, the majority of lncRNAs have not been comprehensively characterized. While the precise molecular mechanisms underlying the functions of lncRNAs remain to be deciphered in DCM, emerging data in other pathophysiological conditions suggests that lncRNAs can have versatile features such as genomic imprinting, acting as guides for certain histone-modifying complexes, serving as scaffolds for specific molecules, or acting as molecular sponges. In an effort to better understand these features of lncRNAs in the context of DCM, our review will first summarize some of the key molecular alterations that occur during fibrosis in the diabetic heart (extracellular proteins and endothelial-to-mesenchymal transitioning), followed by a review of the current knowledge on the crosstalk between lncRNAs and major epigenetic mechanisms (histone methylation, histone acetylation, DNA methylation, and microRNAs) within this fibrotic process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms researchFrench-language works237,207