MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Mutation of the Cardiac Sodium Channel Nav1.5 Leads to Sex Specific Arrhythmias

2021· article· en· W3171848128 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Lee, Kaley Hogarth, Elöd Z. Szabó, Jason T. Maynes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNav1.5Sodium channelMedicineInternal medicineQT intervalMutationSudden cardiac deathCardiologyEndocrinologyBiologyGeneSodiumChemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Cardiac Na v 1.5 sodium channels, encoded by the SCN5A gene, are responsible for initiating the electrical action potential in the heart, resulting in coordinated muscular contraction. Channelopathies caused by mutations in Na v 1.5 occur in 1/2500 individuals and lead to arrhythmic diseases, such as long QT syndrome, and cardiomyopathies 1,2 . Males with Na v 1.5 mutations are at a higher risk for sudden cardiac arrest, indicative of an innate protection in females through an unknown mechanism. The gain of function Arg222Gln mutation affects the voltage sensing segment of Na v 1.5, creating an aberrant pore leading to arrhythmia‐inducing membrane ion leaks 3 . We sought to determine the sex‐specific effects of this clinically relevant mutation, attempting to undercover the protective mechanisms present in females. Methods The Arg222Gln mutation was knocked into exon 6 of the mouse SCN5A gene to generate viable animals that phenocopy the human disease. Three‐lead electrocardiograms (ECG) from adult male and female animals were recorded under anesthesia, including wild‐type (WT) controls. Isoproterenol (β‐adrenoreceptor agonist) was injected to examine electrophysiological changes under acute stress. Baseline echocardiograms were collected at four months and after 30 days of transverse aortic constriction (TAC). Differentially expressed genes from whole heart lysate were measured by chip‐based analysis after TAC . Protein levels were quantified using Western blot and ELISA. Results ECG measurements revealed a prolonged QTc (0.064ms±0.006) and QRS interval (0.011ms±0.0003) in mutant males compared to WT males (0.036ms±0.008 and 0.0085ms±0.0004 respectively) (P<0.05). Mutant males had an observable sinus arrhythmia at baseline (RMSSD of beat to beat intervals of 4.60 vs 0.79 in WT males, P<0.05), whereas mutant and wild‐type females had no evidence of adverse changes to the beating rhythm. The ejection fraction (EF) of mutant males decreased by 40%±9.9% 4 weeks post‐TAC, whereas no significant changes in EF were observed in all other groups. We found that transcript and protein levels of pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase‐4, which reduces pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH) activity through phosphorylation, were 6‐fold higher in mutant males compared to WT males (P<0.05), whereas no differences were observed between females. Despite this, phospho‐PDH levels were lower and PDH activity higher in mutant males compared to WT males (P<0.01), with no differences between the female groups. Conclusion We found functional, electrophysiological, and metabolic enzyme abnormalities in male mice harboring the Arg222Gln Na v 1.5 mutation. These differences did not exist in the female mutant mice. Our data illustrate a strong sex‐specific phenotype, and suggest that metabolic alterations through increased PDH activity provide a protective mechanism against the arrhythmia and heart failure produced by Na v 1.5‐related cation leak. Further experiments will seek to determine if sex hormones alone can induce a protective effect in the context of the Arg222Gln mutation. 1 Priori et al., NEJM, 2003 2 Veerman et al., Gene, 2015 3 Moreau et al., J Gen Physio, 2015

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→