Plasma Leptin Response to an Epinephrine Infusion in Lean and Obese Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Because leptin production by adipose tissue is under hormonal control, we examined the impact of epinephrine administration on plasma leptin concentrations. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: We measured plasma leptin, insulin, and free fatty acid (FFA) responses after a 60-minute epinephrine infusion (0.010 microg/kg fat free mass/min) followed by a 30-minute recovery period (no infusion) in a group of 11 lean (mean body mass index +/- SD: 22.6 +/- 1.1 kg/m(2)) and 15 obese (30.0 +/- 1.3 kg/m(2)) premenopausal women. Leptin, insulin, and FFA levels were measured in plasma before (-15 and 0 minutes) and at every 30 minutes over the 90-minute period. RESULTS: In both lean and obese individuals, plasma leptin was significantly reduced by epinephrine (p < 0.0001). Body fat mass was associated with fasting leptin levels (r = 0.64, p < 0.0005) as well as with the decrease in leptinemia (r = -0.51, p < 0.01) produced by epinephrine administration. Furthermore, we noted a large range of leptin response to epinephrine among our subjects, especially in obese women (from -12 to -570 ng/mL per 60 minutes). However, there was no association between postepinephrine leptin and FFA levels (r = -0.14, p = 0.55). DISCUSSION: Results of this study indicate that leptin levels decrease after epinephrine administration in both lean and obese premenopausal women. However, the heterogeneity in the response of leptin to catecholamines suggests potential alterations of the leptin axis that may contribute to generate a positive energy balance and, thus, may favor weight gain in some obese individuals.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".