MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

AMP‐activated protein kinase (AMPK) activity in Leigh Syndrome French Canadian Type (LSFC) patient fibroblasts: differences between primary and immortalized cell lines

2012· article· en· W3175733549 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yvette Mukaneza, Marie-Ève Rivard, Christine Des Rosiers, Lise Coderre

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAMPKProtein kinase AEndocrinologyInternal medicinePhosphorylationCell cultureChemistryBiologyCell biologyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & Objective LSFC is an autosomal recessive disease caused by mutations in the leucine‐rich pentatricopeptide repeat containing protein (LRPPRC) gene resulting in decreased LRPPRC expression. This leads to a tissue‐specific cytochrome c oxidase deficiency and a reduction in energy production. AMPK is a key enzyme in the regulation of energy homeostasis. To test the hypothesis that AMPK activity may differ in LSFC and control cells, we evaluated the phosphorylated and active form of AMPK in primary (P) fibroblasts and, because of the limited availability of P cells, we also tested their immortalized (I) counterparts. Results Under basal conditions, P fibroblasts from LSFC patients and controls showed marginal differences in the levels of phosphorylated AMPK (pAMPK) as well as acetyl‐CoA carboxylase (ACC), one of many AMPK substrates. However, compared to P cells, I cells from both controls and LSFC patients showed a 60% and 80% decrease in pAMPK, respectively. Consistent with pAMPK levels, phosphorylated ACC levels were also decreased in I cells by 58 % in controls and 69% in LSFC patients. The total levels of these proteins were similar in all cases. Conclusion These results highlight an important decrease in AMPK activity level in I vs. P cells, which may compromise the capacity of these cells to palliate an energy deficit. Supported by: Association de l'acidose lactique and CIHR Emerging Team Grant

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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0030.001

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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer→French-language works237,207→