Adiponectin-SOGA Dissociation in Type 1 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Circulating adiponectin is elevated in human type 1 diabetes (T1D) and nonobese diabetic (NOD) mice without the expected indications of adiponectin action, consistent with tissue resistance. OBJECTIVE: Adiponectin stimulates hepatocyte production of the suppressor of glucose from autophagy (SOGA), a protein that inhibits glucose production. We postulated that due to tissue resistance, the elevation of adiponectin in T1D should fail to increase the levels of a surrogate marker for liver SOGA, the circulating C-terminal SOGA fragment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Liver and plasma SOGA were measured in NOD mice (n = 12) by Western blot. Serum adiponectin and SOGA were measured in T1D and control (Ctrl) participants undergoing a three-stage insulin clamp for the Coronary Artery Calcification in T1D study (n = 20). Glucose turnover was measured using 6,6[(2)H2]glucose (n = 12). RESULTS: In diabetic NOD mice, the 13%-29% decrease of liver SOGA (P = .003) and the 30%-37% reduction of circulating SOGA (P < .001) were correlated (r = 0.826; P = .001). In T1D serum, adiponectin was 50%-60% higher than Ctrl, SOGA was 30%-50% lower and insulin was 3-fold higher (P < .05). At the low insulin infusion rate (4 mU/m(2)·min), the resulting glucose appearance correlated negatively with adiponectin in T1D (r = -0.985, P = .002) and SOGA in Ctrl and T1D (r = -0.837, P = .001). Glucose disappearance correlated with adiponectin in Ctrl (r = -0.757, P = .049) and SOGA in Ctrl and T1D (r = -0.709, P = .010). At 40 mU/m(2)·min, the lowered glucose appearance was similar in Ctrl and T1D. Glucose disappearance increased only in Ctrl (P = .005), requiring greater glucose infusion to maintain euglycemia (8.58 ± 1.29 vs 3.09 ± 0.87 mg/kg·min; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: The correlation between liver and plasma SOGA in NOD mice supports the use of the latter as surrogate marker for liver concentration. Reduced SOGA in diabetic NOD mice suggests resistance to adiponectin. The dissociation between adiponectin and SOGA in T1D raises the possibility that restoring adiponectin signaling and SOGA might improve the metabolic response to insulin therapy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".