ArticleScientific reports2025
BRD4 as the key lactylation related gene in heart failure identified through bioinformatics analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Lactylation and lactate: insights into muscle cell epigenetic regulators in exercise.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Review
- Metabolic-immune crosstalk in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: CD44 and APP identified as causal therapeutic targets via integrated lactylation-Mendelian randomization analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Integrated analysis of gene networks and cellular functions identifies novel heart failure biomarkers.Hereditas · 2025Article
- Revealing lactylation-mediated mechanisms and hub genes in heart failure pathogenesis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Metabolic-immune crosstalk in myocardial infarction: RLF and SMCHD1 identified as causal therapeutic targets via integrated lactylation-MR analysis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lactylation modification is postulated to influence the progression of heart failure (HF) through diverse pathways, albeit the underlying mechanisms remain elusive. Methods In this study, bioinformatics approaches were employed to analyze the HF dataset (GSE5406) retrieved from the Gene Expression Omnibus, with the objective of identifying lactylation-related genes (LRGs). Key LRGs implicated in HF were selected using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) and Weighted Gene Co-Expression Network Analysis (WGCNA). The diagnostic efficacy and biological significance of these genes were evaluated through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, Gene Set Enrichment Analysis, and immune cell infiltration analysis. Furthermore, the findings were validated using single-cell sequencing datasets (GSE161470) and in vitro cell models to ascertain the expression patterns and functional roles of the identified key LRGs. A total of 276 LRGs were identified from the HF dataset. Initial screening utilizing two bioinformatics analysis methods pinpointed BRD4 as a potential pivotal LRG influencing HF progression. ROC analysis revealed a high diagnostic accuracy for BRD4, with an Area Under the Curve score of 0.877. Immune cell infiltration and single-cell data analyses indicated that BRD4 exhibits a strong association with immune cells, including mast cells, T cells, and macrophages, and demonstrates significantly elevated expression in these immune cells as well as in cardiomyocytes. Both BRD4 mRNA and protein levels were found to be upregulated compared to control groups. This study represents the first to utilize multiple bioinformatics analysis methods to identify BRD4 as a key LRG in HF, thereby establishing a foundation for future investigations into acylation-related mechanisms in HF.
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.