Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36497112›Full record

ReviewCells2022

Induction of Cardiac Pathology: Endogenous versus Exogenous Nrf2 Upregulation.

Bryan J Mathis, Hideyuki Kato, Yuji Hiramatsu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cells, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bryan J MathisInternational Medical Center, University of Tsukuba Hospital, Tsukuba 305-8576, Ibaraki, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9879-8289
Hideyuki KatoDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba 305-8575, Ibaraki, Japan.
Yuji HiramatsuInternational Medical Center, University of Tsukuba Hospital, Tsukuba 305-8576, Ibaraki, Japan.
University of Tsukuba Hospital · JPUniversity of Tsukuba · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) is a master regulator of the endogenous antioxidant response to reactive oxygen species as well as a controller of Phase II detoxification in response to xenobiotics. This amenity to specific external manipulation exploits the binding affinity of Nrf2 for its constitutive repressor and degradation facilitator Kelch-like erythroid cell-derived protein with CNC homology-associated protein 1 (Keap1). Derived from both natural and synthesized origins, these compounds have been extensively tested without definitive beneficial results. Unfortunately, multiple terminated trials have shown a negative side to Nrf2 with regard to cardiac pathologies while animal-based studies have demonstrated cardiomyocyte hypertrophy and heart failure after chronic Nrf2 upregulation. Putatively based on autophagic control of Nrf2 activity-modulating upstream factors, new evidence of miRNA involvement has added complexity to this mechanism. What follows is an extensive survey of Nrf2-regulating exogenous compounds that may promote cardiomyopathy, clinical trial evidence, and a comparison to exercise-induced factors that also upregulate Nrf2 while preventing cardiac pathologies.

Indexed as

AntioxidantsNF-E2-Related Factor 2AnimalsKelch-Like ECH-Associated Protein 1Reactive Oxygen SpeciesUp-RegulationAntioxidantsKelch-Like ECH-Associated Protein 1NF-E2-Related Factor 2Reactive Oxygen SpeciesbardoloxonecardiomyopathyCDDOKeap1Nrf2Reata

Identifiers

PMID36497112
PMCPMC9736027
OpenAlexW4311045418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.