MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Effect of Tauroursodeoxycholic Acid (TUDCA) Treatment on Pregnancy Outcomes and Uterine Artery Function in a Rat Model of Advanced Maternal Age

2022· article· en· W4225413414 on OpenAlexafffund
Mazhar Pasha, Raven Kirschenman, Amy L. Wooldridge, Floor Spaans, Christy‐ Lynn Cooke, Sandra T. Davidge

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaWomen and Children’s Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTauroursodeoxycholic acidUterine arteryPregnancyMedicineRat modelObstetricsGynecologyPhysiologyInternal medicineChemistryGestationBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Advanced maternal age (AMA; ≥35 years) increases the risk of pregnancy complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes such as fetal growth restriction. Endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and oxidative stress have been linked to vascular dysfunction (i.e. reduced nitric oxide [NO] & increased endothelin‐1 [ET‐1] levels) in aging. Tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA) is an ER and oxidative stress inhibitor and has been shown to improve embryo development in vitro . However, whether treatment with TUDCA can help improve uterine vascular function and pregnancy outcomes in AMA has not been investigated. We hypothesize that TUDCA treatment will improve pregnancy outcomes and vascular function in a rat model of AMA. Methods Young (4 months) and aged (9.5 months of age; ~35 years in humans) pregnant control or TUDCA‐treated rats were studied on gestational day 20 (term=22 days). Following euthanasia, pregnancy outcomes (litter size, resorption sites, fetal weight, and placental weight) were recorded, and main uterine arteries were isolated. Endothelium‐dependent vasorelaxation to methacholine (MCh) was assessed by wire myography in the presence/absence of pan NO synthase inhibitor (L‐NAME). In addition, big‐endothelin‐1 (bET‐1) vasoconstriction responses were evaluated, in the presence/absence of endothelin converting enzyme (ECE) inhibitor (CGS). Data summarized as maximum vasodilation response (Emax) and analyzed by two‐way ANOVA with Sidak’s post‐test, p<0.05 was considered significant. Results Fetal body weights were reduced in AMA control rats compared to young dams (p<0.017), while TUDCA treatment tended to increase fetal body weight in AMA rats (p=0.067); TUDCA did not affect fetal body weight in the young dams. Placental weights, litter size and number of resorptions were similar in all the groups. The maximum relaxation (Emax) to MCh was impaired in the AMA dams compared to young dam (p=0.047), and this reduced relaxation was not evident in the TUDCA treated AMA dams. Ex vivo treatment with L‐ NAME showed an increased contribution of NO in young TUDCA treated rats (ΔEmax [differences in Emax]; p=0.043) compared to young control rats but not in AMA rats. Ex vivo treatment with CGS demonstrated reduced ECE conversion in young TUDCA treated rats (Emax; p<0.001), while CGS had no effect in the young control dams or both AMA groups. Conclusion Our study assessed TUDCA as an intervention to improve the pregnancy outcomes in a rat model of AMA. An increased fetal body weight suggests a beneficial effect of TUDCA in AMA pregnancies. However, contrary to our hypothesis, in young dams, TUDCA increased NO contribution and reduced ECE effect, but did not affect uterine artery function in AMA dams. Nevertheless, TUDCA has the potential to improve pregnancy outcomes in complicated pregnancies, but further studies are warranted.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies→French-language works237,207→