ArticleNeurourology and urodynamics2006
Muscarinic receptor transcript and protein density in hypertrophied and atrophied rat urinary bladder.
Article in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of pesticide diazinon on gastric cancer cell lines and the alteration of cholinergic and serotonergic pathway genes affecting cell proliferation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Muscarinic receptor subtype mRNA expression in the human prostate: association with age, pathological diagnosis, prostate size, or potentially interfering medications?Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2014Article
- Article
- Temporal morphological and functional impact of complete urinary diversion on the bladder: a model of bladder disuse in rats.The Journal of urology · 2010Article
- Effects of bladder outlet obstruction on properties of Ca2+-activated K+ channels in rat bladder.American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsOur previous studies showed that bladder hypertrophy shifts the muscarinic receptor subtype mediating contraction from M(3) towards M(2) along with increased M(2) and decreased M(3) protein concentration. We quantified mRNA for M(1) through M(5) receptors to determine whether the changes in M(2) and M(3) protein levels was due to changes in transcription.
methodsBladder hypertrophy was induced by bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), major pelvic ganglion electrocautery (DEN), and major pelvic ganglion decentralization (DEC). Bladder atrophy was induced by ureteral diversion (DIV). Additional groups included denervated and diverted (DEN-DIV), sham operated (SHAM), and normal (NOR) controls. Transcripts were quantified using a multiplex ribonuclease protection assay (RPA) and receptor protein density was determined by immunoprecipitation. Receptor transcripts were expressed per unit total RNA.
resultsAlthough all five receptor subtype transcripts were detected in all experimental groups, the densities of M(1), M(4), and M(5) were much lower than for the M(2) and M(3) subtype. There were more M(2) receptor transcripts than all the others, consistent with M(2) protein determinations. M(2) transcripts were significantly increased in DEN and BOO bladders. Surprisingly, M(3) transcripts were also significantly increased in BOO. There was a significant correlation (r=0.98, P<0.001) between protein density and transcript density for the M(2) but not the M(3) receptor among the different experimental groups.
conclusionsChanges in mRNA concentration are reflected by changes in protein density for the M(2) receptor but not for the M(3) receptor. Extrapolation of functional effects from transcript density data is invalid for M(3) mediated bladder contractions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.