032 An Evolving Hypothesis on the Mechanism and Efficacy of Intracavernosal Injection of Botulinum Toxin to Improve Erectile Function: an Animal Study in Aging Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common problem for aging males which significantly impacts both patient and partner quality of life. Current treatment options do not offer long-standing efficacy and therefore a more durable and sustainable treatment is needed. Our previous work has demonstrated that botulinum toxin (BTX) improves erectile function in an aging rat model. We aim to determine the duration of BTX effects and elucidate the mechanism of action as it pertains to penile smooth muscle function. Twenty male Sprague Dawley rats with an average age of 15 months were divided into four experimental groups: Control (NS), BTX 3 days (BTX3D), BTX 1 week (BTX1W) and BTX 2 weeks (BTX2W). The rats received an intracavernous injection of either 10 units of BTX in 80ul normal saline (NS) or 80ul of NS as a control. Rats were observed for either 3 days, 1 week, or 2 weeks after injection. Erectile function was assessed by cavernous nerve electro-stimulation induced intracavernous pressure (ICP). Functional assessments of penile vascular reactivity were carried out by analysing ICP changes in response to either methacholine (MCH) or sodium nitroprusside (SNP) in both BTX and control groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".