Leptin as a Cardiac Pro-Hypertrophic Factor and its Potential Role in the Development of Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identification of the adipocyte as a source of production of biologically-active peptides has materialized into an active area of research related to the role of these peptides in physiology and pathophysiology. Moreover, this research has resulted in the identification of the adipocyte as an endocrine organ producing potent bioactive compounds. An increasing number of these adipokines are being identified, the first of which was leptin, a product of the obesity gene whose primary function is to act as a satiety factor but which is now known to exert a myriad of effects. It is now recognized that virtually all adipokines produce effects on numerous organ systems including the heart and many of these, including leptin, are produced by cardiac tissue. Here we focus primarily on the diverse effects of leptin on the heart especially as it pertains to hypertrophy and discuss the potential cell signaling mechanisms underlying their actions. Current evidence suggests that leptin is a cardiac hypertrophic factor and from clinical studies there is evidence that hyperleptinemia is associated with cardiovascular risk especially as it pertains to heart failure. While more substantial research needs to be carried out, leptin may represent a potential link between obesity, which is associated with hyperleptinemia, and increased cardiovascular risk.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".