MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407356628 · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2025.102690

News from the old: Aging features in the intracardiac, musculoskeletal, and enteric nervous systems

2025· review· en· W4407356628 on OpenAlexaff
Eliza Sassu, Dragana Stefanovska, Mathew R Stoyek, Sebastian Preißl, Luis Hortells

Bibliographic record

VenueAgeing Research Reviews · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnteric nervous systemIntracardiac injectionMedicineNervous systemNeuroscienceInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aging strongly affects the peripheral nervous system (PNS), triggering alterations that vary depending on the innervated tissue. The most frequent alteration in peripheral nerve aging is reduced nerve fiber and glial density which can lead to abnormal nerve functionality. Interestingly, the activation of a destructive phenotype takes place in macrophages across the PNS while a reduced number of neuronal bodies is a unique feature of some enteric ganglia. Single cell/nucleus RNA-sequencing has unveiled a striking complexity of cell populations in the peripheral nerves, and these refined cell type annotations could facilitate a better understanding of PNS aging. While the effects of senescence on individual PNS cell types requires further characterization, the use of senolytics appears to improve general PNS function in models of aging. Here, we review the current understanding of age-related changes of the intracardiac, musculoskeletal, and enteric nervous system sub-sections of the PNS, highlighting their commonalities and differences. • The most common feature of aging in PNS is a reduction of nerve fiber and glial cell density. • PNS macrophages activate a destructive phenotype during aging. • Different sections of the PNS present different ECM protein deposits with age. • The molecular mechanisms behind PNS degeneration during aging remain unclear. • While promising, the effects of senolytics in the PNS need further investigation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgeing Research ReviewsSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207