Resistance to leptin action is the major determinant of hepatic triglyceride accumulation in vivo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Impairment of both insulin and leptin action has been implicated in the pathogenesis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. By assessing hepatic triglyceride (TG) stores in response to modulation of leptin action (by leptin infusion), we attempted to determine whether leptin has the major role in hepatic TG accumulation. TG were markedly decreased (by 63%, P<0.05) in young animals treated with leptin. However, this was also associated with improvement in hepatic insulin action (2-fold decrease in HGP during clamp, P<0.05). These effects on hepatic TG stores and insulin action were abolished in old rats who demonstrate leptin resistance. Since these experiments could not discern the role of leptin from the role of hepatic insulin action on hepatic TG stores, we further examined the effect of improvement of hepatic insulin action by visceral fat removal (VF-). Enhancement of hepatic insulin action in old VF-rats was associated with reduced hepatic TG stores (by 64% P<0.01). Because this manipulation may have induced an improvement in leptin action as well, we studied VF removal in a genetically leptin-resistant model (Zucker Diabetic Fatty rats, ZDF). Only in this mode was exclusive improvement of hepatic insulin action by VF removal not associated with reduced hepatic TG stores, suggesting that improved hepatic insulin action is not necessary for modulation of hepatic TG stores. By dissociating action of leptin from that of insulin, we suggest that the failure of leptin action is the major physiological mechanism for hepatic steatosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".