Does loss of AKAP121 precede induction of cardiac hypertrophy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The A‐kinase anchor proteins (AKAPs) are diverse regulators of cell function, acting as scaffolds to co‐localize the protein kinase A regulatory sub‐unit with target proteins, such as other kinases and phosphatases. We have previously demonstrated that over‐expression of AKAP121 in cardiomyocytes attenuates hypertrophy induced by isoproterenol. Furthermore, knockdown of AKAP121 expression induced spontaneous cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, suggesting that AKAP121 behaves as a potent anti‐hypertrophic regulator. In this study, mice underwent transverse aortic constriction (TAC), resulting in increased cardiac afterload and progressive hypertrophy. Quantitative real‐time polymerase chain reaction (qRT‐PCR) and western blotting was used to examine expression of AKAP121 in banded and sham control animals. The degree of hypertrophy was assessed by heart weight to body weight or tibia length ratios. We hypothesized that AKAP121 expression will decrease soon after banding, prior to frank hypertrophy. Our current results demonstrate a correlation between loss of AKAP121 expression and induction of the hypertrophic gene program in response to pressure overload induced by thoracic aortic banding, thus indicating a potential role for AKAP121 as a regulator of the hypertrophic response in vivo. Our data also suggests that a sex‐specific mechanism may be involved in regulation of hypertrophic gene expression.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".