Glucocorticoid-Induced Modulation of Insulin-Stimulated DNA Synthesis: Differential Responsiveness in Cell Cultures Derived from Donors of Different Ages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The replicative ability of variously 'aged' cell cultures, their insulin binding and biological responsiveness under control and glucocorticoid (i.e. hydrocortisone) amplified conditions have been studied in human fibroblast cultures. Insulin stimulation of DNA synthesis in early and late passage cultures and in cultures from young and old donors showed no age-related difference in insulin responsiveness. Hydrocortisone amplification of insulin-stimulated DNA synthesis in early and late passage cells expressed no age-related differences. Hydrocortisone affected basal DNA synthesis in cultures from in vivo young and old donors differently. Additionally, hydrocortisone amplified insulin-stimulated DNA synthesis in young donor cell cultures was observed to be higher than in old donor cell cultures. Specific 125I-insulin binding was increased by hydrocortisone in both early and late passage cultures and in cultures from young and old donors but no age-related differences in 125I-insulin binding were observed in the presence or absence of hydrocortisone. The data suggest that an age-related loss of an insulin postreceptor interaction during hydrocortisone amplification of insulin-stimulated DNA synthesis is being expressed in the cultures from old donors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".