Circulating endocannabinoids in insulin sensitive vs. Insulin resistant obese postmenopausal women. A MONET group study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure the circulating levels of endocannabinoids and related molecules at fasting, after acute hyperinsulinemia and after weight loss in insulin sensitive vs. insulin resistant obese postmenopausal women. DESIGN AND METHODS: The sample consisted of 30 obese postmenopausal women (age: 58.9 ± 5.2 yrs; BMI: 32.9 ± 3.6 kg/m(2) ). Subjects underwent a 3-hour hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp (HEC) (glucose disposal rate (M-value): 10.7 ± 3.3 mg min(-1) kg(-1) FFM) and 6-month weight loss intervention. Participants were classified as insulin sensitive obese (ISO) or insulin resistant obese (IRO) based on a predefined cutoff. Plasma levels of the endocannabinoids, anandamide (AEA), 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), and of the AEA-related compounds, palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) and oleoylethanolamide (OEA), were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. RESULTS: IRO presented higher levels of 2-AG (P < 0.05) independently of the HEC and weight loss, whereas the HEC had an independent inhibitory effect on AEA, PEA, and OEA levels (P < 0.05) in both groups. Furthermore, there was an independent stimulatory effect of weight loss only on PEA levels in both groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to show that higher circulating levels of the endocannabinoid 2-AG are found in IRO compared to ISO postmenopausal women, and that weight loss is associated with an increase in PEA, a PPAR-α ligand.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".