Given a passage classify if the passage has a definite objective/aim/goal or not. Output '1' if the passage has a defininte objective/aim/goal and output '0' if the passage does not have a definite objective/aim/goal.

[Q]: Human hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) heterogeneity promotes recurrence and resistance to therapies. Recent studies have reported that HCC may be derived not only from adult hepatocytes and hepatoblasts but also hepatic stem/progenitors. In this context, HepaRG cells may represent a suitable cellular model to study stem/progenitor cancer cells and the retrodifferentiation of tumor-derived hepatocyte-like cells. Indeed, they differentiate into hepatocyte- and biliary-like cells. Moreover, tumor-derived HepaRG hepatocyte-like cells (HepaRG-tdHep) differentiate into both hepatocyte- and biliary-like cells through a hepatic progenitor. In this study we report the mechanisms and molecular effectors involved in the retrodifferentiation of HepaRG-tdHep into bipotent progenitors. Gene expression profiling was used to identify genomic changes during the retrodifferentiation of HepaRG-tdHep into progenitors. We demonstrated that gene expression signatures related to a poor-prognosis HCC subclass, proliferative progenitors, or embryonic stem cells were significantly enriched in HepaRG progenitors derived from HepaRG-tdHep. HepaRG-tdHep retrodifferentiation is mediated by crosstalk between transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGFβ1) and inflammatory cytokine pathways (e.g., tumor necrosis factor alpha [TNFα] and interleukin 6 [IL6]). Signatures related to TNFα, IL6, and TGFβ activation pathways are induced within the first hour of retrodifferentiation. Moreover, specific activation or inhibition of these signaling pathways allowed us to determine that TNFα and IL6 contribute to the loss of hepatic-specific marker expression and that TGFβ1 induces an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition of HepaRG-tdHep. Interestingly, the retrodifferentiation process is blocked by the histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A, opening new therapeutic opportunities.
[A]: 0


[Q]: It is still uncertain whether or not there is a difference between metoprolol and carvedilol for the treatment of congestive heart failure. We attempted to determine the difference between the two beta-blockers in terms of their antiadrenergic effect during exercise in patients with heart failure and their efficacy based on the baseline plasma brain natriuretic peptide concentration.', 'Fifty-three patients with mild to moderate heart failure with a radionuclide left ventricular ejection fraction <40% received open label metoprolol or carvedilol in a randomized fashion. The increase in the heart rate normalized to the increase in the plasma norepinephrine concentration during exercise, was calculated as an index of adrenergic responsiveness during exercise.', 'The increase in heart rate normalized by the increase in plasma norepinephrine concentration, decreased after the initiation of beta-blockers in the carvedilol group, but not in the metoprolol group. The change in cardiac function was more favorable for carvedilol than metoprolol in patients who exhibited a higher baseline brain natriuretic peptide concentration.
[A]: 0


[Q]: We examined whether the presence and extent of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) predict adverse outcomes in nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) patients.', 'Morbidity and mortality is high in NICM patients. However, the clinical course of an individual patient is unpredictable and current risk stratification approaches are limited. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance detects myocardial fibrosis, which appears as LGE after contrast administration and may convey prognostic importance.', 'In a prospective cohort study, 65 NICM patients with left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction < or =35% underwent CMR before placement of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. The CMR images were analyzed for the presence and extent of LGE and for LV function, volumes, and mass. Patients were followed for an index composite end point of 3 cardiac events: hospitalization for heart failure, appropriate ICD firing, and cardiac death.', 'A total of 42% (n = 27) of patients had CMR LGE, averaging 10 +/- 13% of LV mass. During a 17-month median follow-up, 44% (n = 12) of patients with LGE had an index composite outcome event versus only 8% (n = 3) of those without LGE (p < 0.001 for Kaplan-Meier survival curves). After adjustment for LV volume index and functional class, patients with LGE had an 8-fold higher risk of experiencing the primary outcome (hazard ratio 8.2, 95% confidence interval 2.2 to 30.9; p = 0.002).
[A]:
1