MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

MELAS and POLG exhibit high rates of hypertension with differential resistance to anti‐hypertensive drugs suggesting divergent pathogenic mechanisms

2017· article· en· W2968950378 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew D. Pauls, Dayna‐Lynn Nevay, Dana Young, Vikrant Sandhu, Darwin F. Yeung, Michael MY Tsang, Teresa S.M. Tsang, André Mattman, Michelle M. Mezei, Damon Poburko

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMitochondrial Function and Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver General HospitalSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMELAS syndromeMitochondrial encephalomyopathyMedicineInternal medicineMitochondrial DNALactic acidosisBlood pressureDiabetes mellitusCardiologyMitochondrial diseaseEndocrinologyMitochondrial myopathyGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background We previously reported elevated hypertension (HT) rates in adults with the m.3243A>G mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke‐like episodes (MELAS) mutation. The cause of HT in MELAS is not known but could be linked to dysautonomia and endothelial dysfunction. Hypertension is also reported in transgenic mice that have an error‐prone gamma DNA polymerase (POLG) that increases mtDNA mutation rate. In contrast to MELAS, HT in POLG−/− mice appears to be due to hypertrophy of the tunica media . It is not known if humans with pathogenic POLG mutations similarly exhibit HT, and whether the hemodynamic basis of HT in MELAS and POLG are consistent with common or distinct pathogenic mechanisms. Purpose We aimed to examine whether POLG patients have an increased risk of HT, and whether the hemodynamics and therapeutic sensitivity of such HT resembles that of HT in MELAS patients. Specifically, we hypothesized that POLG patients would be prone to isolated systolic HT, while MELAS patients should exhibit remodeling of resistance vessels. Methods We conducted a chart review at the Adult Metabolic Disease Clinic, Vancouver General Hospital of 35 MELAS and 26 POLG patients in accordance with institutional human research ethics guidelines. Demographic factors, including age, weight, BMI, sex, smoking status and diabetes status were collected. Patients were scored as hypertensive if they were on anti‐hypertensive drugs or had consistently elevated blood pressure measurements in accordance with the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Guidelines. Results MELAS and POLG patients showed increased prevalence of HT (20–39 yr age group: 30% MELAS, 14% POLG; 40–59 yr: 71%, 57%; 60–79 yr: 83%, 81%) compared to the Canadian population. Hypertension was not associated with sex, smoking or BMI, and exceeded expected levels given 50% of MELAS patients were diabetic. In the 40–59 and 60–79 yr age groups, antihypertensive drugs controlled systolic blood pressure in MELAS but not in POLG patients (40–59 yr: POLG 145 ± 21 mmHg n = 8 vs MELAS 122 ± 23 n = 12; 60–79 yr: POLG 157 ± 6 n=4 vs MELAS 134 ± 21 n=5), while diastolic blood pressure did not differ between MELAS and POLG. Preliminary analyses suggest that MELAS, but not POLG, patients exhibit elevated peripheral resistance despite therapeutic correction of blood pressure. Conclusions MELAS and POLG increase the risk of HT, which can increase the propensity for cardiac hypertrophy and cerebrovascular problems. Signs of vascular remodeling as a contributor to HT suggest that early therapeutic treatment at the onset of pre‐hypertension may be warranted to prevent and control HT in these diseases, especially POLG. These findings warrant detailed hemodynamic assessments in larger populations.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicMitochondrial Function and Pathology→French-language works237,207→