Elimination or neutralization of endogenous high-molecular-weight FGF2 mitigates doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2) exerts multiple paracrine activities related to cardiac response to injury. Endogenous FGF2 is composed of a mixture of 70% high- and 30% low-molecular-weight isoforms (Hi-FGF2 and Lo-FGF2, respectivley); although exogenously added Lo-FGF2 is cardioprotective, the roles of endogenous Hi-FGF2 or Lo-FGF2 have not been well defined. Therefore, we investigated the effect of elimination of Hi-FGF2 expression on susceptibility to acute cardiac damage in vivo caused by an injection of the genotoxic drug doxorubicin (Dox). Mice genetically depleted of endogenous Hi-FGF2 and expressing only Lo-FGF2 [FGF2(Lo) mice] were protected from the Dox-induced decline in ejection fraction displayed by their wild-type FGF2 [FGF2(WT)] mouse counterparts, regardless of sex, as assessed by echocardiography for up to 10 days post-Dox treatment. Because cardiac FGF2 is produced mainly by nonmyocytes, we next addressed potential contribution of fibroblast-produced FGF2 on myocyte vulnerability to Dox. In cocultures of neonatal rat cardiomyocytes (r-cardiomyocytes) with mouse fibroblasts from FGF2(WT) or FGF2(Lo) mice, only the FGF2(Lo)-fibroblast cocultures protected r-cardiomyocytes from Dox-induced mitochondrial and cellular damage. When r-cardiomyocytes were cocultured with or exposed to conditioned medium from human fibroblasts, neutralizing antibodies for human Hi-FGF-2, but not total FGF2, mitigated Dox-induced injury of cardiomyocytes. We conclude that endogenous Hi-FGF2 reduces cardioprotection by endogenous Lo-FGF2. Antibody-based neutralization of endogenous Hi-FGF2 may offer a prophylactic treatment against agents causing acute cardiac damage. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Cardiomyocytes, in vivo and in vitro, were protected from the deleterious effects of the anticancer drug doxorubicin by the genetic elimination or antibody-based neutralization of endogenous paracrine high-molecular-weight fibroblast growth factor 2 isoforms. These findings have a translational potential for mitigating doxorubicin-induced cardiac damage in patients with cancer by an antibody-based treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".