Sex differences in the response to angiotensin II receptor blockade in a rat model of eccentric cardiac hypertrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim of study was to evaluate the development of cardiac hypertrophy (CH) in response to left ventricle (LV) volume overload (VO) caused by chronic aortic valve regurgitation (AR) in male and female rats treated or not with angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB), valsartan. We studied 8 groups of Wistar rats: male or female, AR or sham-operated (sham) and treated or not with valsartan (30 mg/kg/day) for 9 weeks starting one week before AR surgical induction. As expected, VO from AR resulted for both male and female rats in significant LV dilation (39% vs. 40% increase of end-diastolic LV diameter, respectively; p<0.0001) and CH (53% vs. 64% increase of heart weight, respectively; p<0.0001) compared to sham. Sex differences were observed in the LV wall thickening in response to VO. In untreated AR males, relative LV wall thickness (a ratio of wall thickness to end-diastolic diameter) was reduced compared to sham, whereas this ratio in females remained unchanged. ARB treatment did not prevent LV dilation for both male and female animals but reversed LV wall thickening in females. Systolic and diastolic functions in AR animals were altered similarly for both sexes compared to sham. ARB treatment did not improve systolic function but help normalizing diastolic parameters in female AR rats. Increased LV expression of Anp and Bnp genes was normalized by ARB treatment in AR females but not in males. Other hypertrophy gene markers (Fos, Trpc6, Klf15, Myh6 and Myh7) were not modulated by ARB treatment. The same was true for genes related to LV extracellular matrix remodeling (Col1a1, Col3a1, Fn1, Mmp2, Timp1 and Lox). In summary, ARB treatment of rats with severe AR blocked the female-specific hypertrophic response characterized by LV chamber wall thickening. LV dilation, on the other hand, was not significantly decreased by ARB treatment.
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".