Role of oxidative stress versus lipids in monocrotaline‐induced pulmonary hypertension and right heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a global health issue with a prevalence of 10% in ages >65 years. Right heart failure (RHF) is the main cause of death in PH. We have previously shown that monocrotaline (MCT)-induced PH and RHF are due to an increase in oxidative stress. In this study, probucol (PROB), a strong antioxidant with a lipid-lowering property, versus lovastatin (LOV), a strong lipid-lowering drug with some antioxidant effects, were evaluated for their effects on the MCT-induced RHF. Rats were treated (I.P.) with PROB (10 mg/kg ×12) or LOV (4 mg/kg ×12), daily 6 days before and 6 days after a single MCT injection (60 mg/kg). Serial echocardiography was performed and at 4-week post-MCT, lung wet-to-dry weight, hemodynamics, RV glutathione peroxidase (GSHPx), superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase, lipid peroxidation, and myocardial as well as plasma lipids were examined. MCT increased RV systolic and diastolic pressures, wall thickness, RV end diastolic diameter, mortality, and decreased ejection fraction as well as pulmonary artery acceleration time. These changes were mitigated by PROB while LOV had no effect. Furthermore, PROB prevented lipid peroxidation, lowered lipids, and increased GSHPx and SOD in RV myocardium. LOV did decrease the lipids but had no effect on antioxidants and lipid peroxidation. A reduction in oxidative stress and not the lipid-lowering effect of PROB may explain the prevention of MCT-induced PH, RHF, and mortality. Thus targeting of oxidative stress as an adjuvant therapy is suggested.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".