Nuclear Receptors as Therapeutic Targets for Neurodegenerative Diseases: Lost in Translation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurodegenerative diseases are characterized by a progressive loss of neurons that leads to a broad range of disabilities, including severe cognitive decline and motor impairment, for which there are no effective therapies. Several lines of evidence support a putative therapeutic role of nuclear receptors (NRs) in these types of disorders. NRs are ligand-activated transcription factors that regulate the expression of a wide range of genes linked to metabolism and inflammation. Although the activation of NRs in animal models of neurodegenerative disease exhibits promising results, the translation of this strategy to clinical practice has been unsuccessful. In this review we discuss the role of NRs in neurodegenerative diseases in light of preclinical and clinical studies, as well as new findings derived from the analysis of transcriptomic databases from humans and animal models. We discuss the failure in the translation of NR-based therapeutic approaches and consider alternative and novel research avenues in the development of effective therapies for neurodegenerative diseases.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it