Insulin-exacerbated hypertension in captopril-treated spontaneously hypertensive rats: role of sympathoexcitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insulin excess exacerbates hypertension in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR). This study examined the relative contribution of the renin-angiotensin system and the sympathetic nervous system in this phenomenon. In SHR, daily subcutaneous injections of insulin were initiated either before short-term angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition with captopril or after lifetime captopril treatment. Insulin treatment resulted in significant increases in mean arterial pressure and heart rate and captopril treatment lowered arterial pressure, but captopril did not lower arterial pressure more in the insulin-treated compared with control rats. To test the contribution of the sympathetic nervous system to this form of hypertension, each rat was intravenously infused with either a ganglionic blocker (i.e., hexamethonium) or a centrally acting alpha2-adrenergic receptor agonist (i.e., clonidine). Administration of either agent largely eliminated the differences in mean arterial pressure and heart rate between the insulin-treated and saline-treated SHR, irrespective of captopril treatment. These data indicate that in SHR, the ability of insulin to increase blood pressure is closely related to sympathoexcitation, which is unresponsive to blockade of angiotensin-converting enzyme.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".