MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174754293 · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009137

A computational model of pig ventricular cardiomyocyte electrophysiology and calcium handling: Translation from pig to human electrophysiology

2021· article· en· W3174754293 on OpenAlexaff
Namit Gaur, Xiaoyan Qi, David Benoîst, Olivier Bernus, Ruben Coronel, Stanley Nattel, Edward J. Vigmond

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Computational Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersFondation LeducqCHIST-ERAAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsElectrophysiologyRepolarizationAfterdepolarizationCardiac electrophysiologyBiophysicsBiologyMyocytehERGInternal medicineChemistryCell biologyNeurosciencePotassium channelMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pig is commonly used as an experimental model of human heart disease, including for the study of mechanisms of arrhythmia. However, there exist differences between human and porcine cellular electrophysiology: The pig action potential (AP) has a deeper phase-1 notch, a longer duration at 50% repolarization, and higher plateau potentials than human. Ionic differences underlying the AP include larger rapid delayed-rectifier and smaller inward-rectifier K+-currents (IKr and IK1 respectively) in humans. AP steady-state rate-dependence and restitution is steeper in pigs. Porcine Ca2+ transients can have two components, unlike human. Although a reliable computational model for human ventricular myocytes exists, one for pigs is lacking. This hampers translation from results obtained in pigs to human myocardium. Here, we developed a computational model of the pig ventricular cardiomyocyte AP using experimental datasets of the relevant ionic currents, Ca2+-handling, AP shape, AP duration restitution, and inducibility of triggered activity and alternans. To properly capture porcine Ca2+ transients, we introduced a two-step process with a faster release in the t-tubular region, followed by a slower diffusion-induced release from a non t-tubular subcellular region. The pig model behavior was compared with that of a human ventricular cardiomyocyte (O'Hara-Rudy) model. The pig, but not the human model, developed early afterdepolarizations (EADs) under block of IK1, while IKr block led to EADs in the human but not in the pig model. At fast rates (pacing cycle length = 400 ms), the human cell model was more susceptible to spontaneous Ca2+ release-mediated delayed afterdepolarizations (DADs) and triggered activity than pig. Fast pacing led to alternans in human but not pig. Developing species-specific models incorporating electrophysiology and Ca2+-handling provides a tool to aid translating antiarrhythmic and arrhythmogenic assessment from the bench to the clinic.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS Computational BiologySame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207