MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hormonal Signaling Actions on Kv7.1 (KCNQ1) Channels

2020· review· en· W3043081900 on OpenAlexaff
Emely Thompson, Jodene Eldstrom, David Fedida

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepolarizationCell biologyPotassium channelCardiac action potentialBiologyMembrane potentialNeuroscienceChemistryBiophysicsElectrophysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kv7 channels (Kv7.1–7.5) are voltage-gated K+channels that can be modulated by five β-subunits (KCNE1–5). Kv7.1-KCNE1 channels produce the slow-delayed rectifying K+current, IKs, which is important during the repolarization phase of the cardiac action potential. Kv7.2–7.5 are predominantly neuronally expressed and constitute the muscarinic M-current and control the resting membrane potential in neurons. Kv7.1 produces drastically different currents as a result of modulation by KCNE subunits. This flexibility allows the Kv7.1 channel to have many roles depending on location and assembly partners. The pharmacological sensitivity of Kv7.1 channels differs from that of Kv7.2–7.5 and is largely dependent upon the number of β-subunits present in the channel complex. As a result, the development of pharmaceuticals targeting Kv7.1 is problematic. This review discusses the roles and the mechanisms by which different signaling pathways affect Kv7.1 and KCNE channels and could potentially provide different ways of targeting the channel.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annual Review of Pharmacology and ToxicologySame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207