Minimally Invasive Sampling of Transdermal Body Fluid for the Purpose of Measuring Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I During Exercise Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) is a ubiquitous hormone that is secreted in both an endocrine and an autocrine/paracrine manner. IGF-I has conventionally been measured in serum; however, transdermal body fluid (TDF) remains as an unexplored biocompartment in which IGF-I also resides and may be more biologically relevant because of its proximity to tissues and cells. The purpose of this study was to compare IGF-I in serum versus IGF-I in TDF before and after 8 weeks of physical training. Twenty-eight healthy men (28 +/- 5 years old, 176 +/- 8 cm tall, weighing 83 +/- 11 kg) had TDF obtained by a novel, minimally invasive method that included the application of continuous vacuum pressure on forearm skin perforated with tiny micropores created by a focused beam from a laser system and also had blood obtained by venipuncture. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay measured total IGF-I concentrations. A repeated-measures analysis of variance (biocompartment x time) and Pearson Product Moment Correlation coefficients (P < or = 0.05) were used for statistical analyses. Data are presented as mean +/- SE. Total TDF IGF-I was significantly lower than serum IGF-I both before (TDF, 91 +/- 6 ng/mL; serum, 375 +/- 17 ng/mL) and after (TDF, 83 +/- 5 ng/mL; serum, 363 +/- 19 ng/mL) the exercise training. Serum and TDF IGF-I values were not significantly different pre- to post-training. Serum and TDF IGF-I levels were significantly correlated pre-training (r = 0.41), but not post-training (r = 0.34). The percent change between serum and TDF was not correlated (r = 0.09). This study has demonstrated that total IGF-I can be sampled and measured in TDF via a minimally invasive manner and is appreciably (approximately 76%) less than total IGF-I measured in serum. Additionally, the IGF-I measurements in these two biocompartments were not closely associated, possibly indicating an uncoupled, rather than a linked, regulation of IGF-I among the body's biocompartments.
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".