MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965744780 · doi:10.1210/en.2002-220116

Minireview: Insights from Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein Transgenic Mice

2002· review· en· W1965744780 on OpenAlexaff
Josef V. Silha, Liam J. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrinology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSomatomedinGenetically modified mouseEndocrinologyTransgeneInternal medicineBiologyPhenotypeInsulin-like growth factor-binding proteinGlucose homeostasisProtein subunitKnockout mouseGrowth factorInsulin-like growth factorInsulinHormoneBiochemistryReceptorGrowth hormoneInsulin resistanceGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existence of abundant high affinity binding proteins for the IGFs, the IGF binding proteins (IGFBPs), was first demonstrated more than 40 yr ago in the very early days of somatomedin research. With the development of molecular techniques and transgenic and knockout mouse models, the nature, complexity, and redundancy of the IGFBPs have now started to be elucidated. Indeed the functional role of the circulating IGFs and the originally proposed endocrine somatomedin hypothesis have recently been questioned. The limited reports to date indicate that IGFBP knockout mice have few phenotypic manifestations. In contrast, overexpression of IGFBPs in transgenic mice is associated with manifestations that provide some insight into the physiological role of the binding proteins. The predominant effect of generalized or tissue-specific overexpression of the IGFBPs has been growth inhibition as would be anticipated from inhibition of the actions of IGF-I and -II. In addition, impaired glucose homeostasis and reduced fecundity have been observed in both IGFBP-1- and IGFBP-3-overexpressing transgenic mice. This review examines the data reported to date for transgenic mouse models that overexpress IGFBPs. In addition, data from transgenic mice that overexpress the acid-labile subunit, an important component of the ternary complex, have also been reviewed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations68
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndocrinologySame topicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth FactorsFrench-language works237,207