Increased Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue Expression of Genes Involved in Glycerolipid-Fatty Acid Cycling in Obese Insulin-Resistant Versus -Sensitive Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: A subpopulation of obese individuals remains insulin sensitive (ISO). They represent a unique human model to investigate factors underlying insulin resistance (IR) without the confounding effect of major differences in weight/adiposity. Altered fatty-acid (FA) metabolism in sc adipose tissue (SAT) contributes to obesity-associated IR. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that ISO and body mass index-matched insulin-resistant obese (IRO) patients demonstrate differential SAT expression profiles of genes involved in glycerolipid-FA metabolism and that weight loss-induced improvement of IR ameliorates these changes. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION: Thirty-eight nondiabetic obese women were stratified into ISO (n = 25) or IRO (n = 13) groups based on hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp results. Subjects were studied before and after a 6-month hypocaloric diet intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: mRNA (quantitative RT-PCR) and protein (mass spectrometry and immunoblots) levels were measured in SAT biopsies. RESULTS: Despite having age, body mass index, and fat mass similar to ISO individuals, IRO patients had lower insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance (P < .05). Baseline SAT mRNA and protein levels of genes involved in both the synthesis and lipolysis of glycerolipid-FAs were higher in IRO individuals (P < .05), even when groups were matched for visceral adipose tissue content. The dietary intervention resulted in approximately 6% weight loss in both the IRO and ISO groups (P < .05) but only ameliorated insulin sensitivity in IRO individuals (P < .05). Likewise, the intervention reduced the expression of most glycerolipid-FA metabolism genes (P < .05), with expression levels in IRO individuals being restored to ISO levels. CONCLUSIONS: Increased SAT expression of genes involved in both the synthesis and hydrolysis of glycerolipid-FAs is closely associated with IR in obese women. The results suggest that enhanced glycerolipid-FA cycling in SAT contributes to obesity-associated IR.
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".