MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988134078 · doi:10.1177/2045894019889775

Hot topics in the mechanisms of pulmonary arterial hypertension disease: cancer‐like pathobiology, the role of the adventitia, systemic involvement, and right ventricular failure

2019· article· en· W2988134078 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePulmonary Circulation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAgence Nationale de la RechercheU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary hypertensionAdventitiaCardiologyPathophysiology of hypertensionDiseaseInternal medicineHeart failurePathogenesisPathologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to intervene appropriately and develop disease-modifying therapeutics for pulmonary arterial hypertension, it is crucial to understand the mechanisms of disease pathogenesis and progression. We herein discuss four topics of disease mechanisms that are currently highly debated, yet still unsolved, in the field of pulmonary arterial hypertension. Is pulmonary arterial hypertension a cancer-like disease? Does the adventitia play an important role in the initiation of pulmonary vascular remodeling? Is pulmonary arterial hypertension a systemic disease? Does capillary loss drive right ventricular failure? While pulmonary arterial hypertension does not replicate all features of cancer, anti-proliferative cancer therapeutics might still be beneficial in pulmonary arterial hypertension if monitored for safety and tolerability. It was recognized that the adventitia as a cell-rich compartment is important in the disease pathogenesis of pulmonary arterial hypertension and should be a therapeutic target, albeit the data are inconclusive as to whether the adventitia is involved in the initiation of neointima formation. There was agreement that systemic diseases can lead to pulmonary arterial hypertension and that pulmonary arterial hypertension can have systemic effects related to the advanced lung pathology, yet there was less agreement on whether idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension is a systemic disease per se. Despite acknowledging the limitations of exactly assessing vascular density in the right ventricle, it was recognized that the failing right ventricle may show inadequate vascular adaptation resulting in inadequate delivery of oxygen and other metabolites. Although the debate was not meant to result in a definite resolution of the specific arguments, it sparked ideas about how we might resolve the discrepancies by improving our disease modeling (rodent models, large-animal studies, studies of human cells, tissues, and organs) as well as standardization of the models. Novel experimental approaches, such as lineage tracing and better three-dimensional imaging of experimental as well as human lung and heart tissues, might unravel how different cells contribute to the disease pathology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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