Fat Depot‐specific Impact of Visceral Obesity on Adipocyte Adiponectin Release in Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to examine omental and subcutaneous adipocyte adiponectin release in women. We tested the hypothesis that adiponectin release would be reduced to a greater extent in omental than in subcutaneous adipocytes of women with visceral obesity. Omental and subcutaneous adipose tissue samples were obtained from 52 women undergoing abdominal hysterectomies (age: 47.1 +/- 4.8 years; BMI: 26.7 +/- 4.7 kg/m(2)). Adipocytes were isolated and their adiponectin release in the medium was measured over 2 h. Measures of body fat accumulation and distribution were obtained using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and computed tomography, respectively. Adiponectin release by omental and subcutaneous adipocytes was similar in lean individuals; however, in subsamples of obese or visceral obese women, adiponectin release by omental adipocytes was significantly reduced while that of subcutaneous adipocytes was not affected. Omental adipocyte adiponectin release was significantly and negatively correlated with total body fat mass (r = -0.47, P < 0.01), visceral adipose tissue area (r = -0.50, P < 0.01), omental adipocyte diameter (r = -0.43, P < 0.01), triglyceride levels (r = -0.32, P < or = 0.05), cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol (r = -0.31, P < or = 0.05), fasting glucose (r = -0.39, P < or = 0.01), fasting insulin (r = -0.36, P < or = 0.05), homeostasis model assessment index (r = -0.39, P < or = 0.01), and positively associated with HDL-cholesterol concentrations (r = 0.33, P < or = 0.05). Adiponectin release from subcutaneous cells was not associated with any measure of adiposity, lipid profile, or glucose homeostasis. In conclusion, compared to subcutaneous adipocyte adiponectin release, omental adipocyte adiponectin release is reduced to a greater extent in visceral obese women and better predicts obesity-associated metabolic abnormalities.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".