MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2964053952 · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-47087-7

Systems biology and network pharmacology of frailty reveal novel epigenetic targets and mechanisms

2019· article· en· W2964053952 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Carlos Gómez-Verján, Ricardo Ramírez‐Aldana, Mario Ulises Pérez‐Zepeda, Ricardo Quiroz‐Baez, Armando Luna‐López, Luis Miguel Gutiérrez‐Robledo

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
FundersSecretaría de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación del Distrito Federal
KeywordsInteractomeMyostatinEpigeneticsGlucocorticoid receptorBioinformaticsBiologySystems biologyGene regulatory networkCancerComputational biologyMedicineGeneGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frailty is an age-associated condition, characterized by an inappropriate response to stress that results in a higher frequency of adverse outcomes (e.g., mortality, institutionalization and disability). Some light has been shed over its genetic background, but this is still a matter of debate. In the present study, we used network biology to analyze the interactome of frailty-related genes at different levels to relate them with pathways, clinical deficits and drugs with potential therapeutic implications. Significant pathways involved in frailty: apoptosis, proteolysis, muscle proliferation, and inflammation; genes as FN1, APP, CREBBP, EGFR playing a role as hubs and bottlenecks in the interactome network and epigenetic factors as HIST1H3 cluster and miR200 family were also involved. When connecting clinical deficits and genes, we identified five clusters that give insights into the biology of frailty: cancer, glucocorticoid receptor, TNF-α, myostatin, angiotensin converter enzyme, ApoE, interleukine-12 and -18. Finally, when performing network pharmacology analysis of the target nodes, some compounds were identified as potentially therapeutic (e.g., epigallocatechin gallate and antirheumatic agents); while some other substances appeared to be toxicants that may be involved in the development of this condition.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→