Protective effects of sildenafil administration on chemotherapeutic-induced ovarian damage in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agents to reduce the gonadotoxic effects of chemotherapeutics are still under investigation. In this context, we aimed to investigate the protective effect of sildenafil against chemotherapeutic-induced gonadotoxicity in a rat model. A total of 62 female rats were divided into eight groups as control, sildenafil (1.4 mg/kg, orally), doxorubicin (3 mg/kg, i.p.), cisplatin (5 mg/kg, i.p.), cyclophosphamide (200 mg/kg, i.p.), doxorubicin+sildenafil, cisplatin+sildenafil, and cyclophosphamide+sildenafil (1.4 mg/kg orally sildenafil in addition to the same dose of chemotherapeutics). The groups were compared in terms of follicle count, ovarian size, and anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) levels. Use of sildenafil with cyclophosphamide was effective only in preserving primary follicle count (p = 0.026) and had no significant change in the secondary follicle count, ovarian size, or AMH level. Adding sildenafil to cisplatin had a significant protective effect on primary follicle count (p = 0.011), secondary follicle count (p = 0.009), and ovarian size (p = 0.001), but this effect could not be demonstrated at AMH level. Sildenafil was not effective on any parameter in the doxorubicin group. Sildenafil may be effective in reducing the gonadotoxicity associated with the use of cisplatin and cyclophosphamide.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".