The influence of estrogen on myocardial post-translational modifications and cardiac function in women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lifetime risk of heart failure (HF) is comparable in men and women; nevertheless, disparities exist in our understanding of how HF differs between sexes. Several differences in cardiac physiology exist between men and women including the propensity to develop specific HF phenotypes. Men are more likely to be diagnosed with HF failure with reduced ejection fraction, while women have a greater propensity to develop HF with preserved ejection fraction. The mechanisms responsible for these differences remain unclear. Post-translational modifications (PTMs) of myofilament proteins likely contribute to these sex-specific propensities. The role of PTMs in heart disease is an expanding field with immense potential therapeutic targets. However, numerous PTMs remain underexplored, particularly in the context of the female heart. Estrogen, a key gonadal hormone, cardioprotective in pre-menopausal women and its loss with menopause likely contributes to disease in aging women. However, how estrogen regulates PTMs to contribute to HF development is not fully clear. This review outlines key sex differences in HF along with characterizing the contributions of novel myocardial PTMs in cardiac physiology and their regulation by estrogen. Collectively, we highlight the necessity for further investigation into women's heart health and the distinctive mechanisms distinguishing women from men.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".