Reviewing the impact of hydroxyurea on <scp>DNA</scp> methylation and its potential clinical implications in sickle cell disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydroxyurea (HU) is the most common drug therapy for sickle cell disease (SCD). The clinical benefits of HU derive from its upregulation of fetal hemoglobin (HbF), which reduces aggregation of the mutated sickle hemoglobin protein (HbS) and reduces SCD symptoms and complications. However, some individuals do not respond to HU, or stop responding over time. Unfortunately, current understanding of the mechanism of action of HU is limited, hindering the ability of clinicians to identify those patients who will respond to HU and to optimize treatment for those receiving HU. Given that epigenetic modifications are essential to erythropoiesis and HbF expression, we hypothesize that some effects of HU may be mediated by epigenetic modifications, specifically DNA methylation. However, few studies have investigated this possibility and the effects of HU on DNA methylation remain relatively understudied. In this review, we discuss the evidence linking HU treatment to DNA methylation changes and associated gene expression changes, with an emphasis on studies that were performed in individuals with SCD. Overall, although HU can affect DNA methylation, research on these changes and their clinical effects remains limited. Further study is likely to contribute to our understanding of hematopoiesis and benefit patients suffering from SCD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".