Development of aberrant crypt foci in the colons of <i>ob</i>/<i>ob</i> and <i>db</i>/<i>db</i> mice: Evidence that leptin is not a promoter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leptin is elevated in obesity and has been suggested to increase the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), although the evidence is conflicting. The objective of this study was to compare the susceptibility to colon carcinogenesis of db/db mice that have highly elevated circulating leptin and leptin-deficient ob/ob mice, both of which are obese. Seven-week-old male ob/ob, db/db, and WT mice received 4 weekly i.p. injections of 5 mg/kg azoxymethane (AOM) and were killed 14 wk later for the analysis of putative preneoplastic aberrant crypt foci (ACF). There were no differences in ACF number or multiplicity between ob/ob and db/db mice. Leptin has been shown to induce CYP2E1, the main enzyme that activates AOM, but we observed no differences in hepatic CYP2E1 activity or colonic CYP2E1 protein levels between ob/ob and db/db mice. We also induced ACF with 2 oral doses 3 d apart of 30 mg/kg methylnitrosourea (MNU), a direct-acting carcinogen. There were no differences in ACF number or multiplicity between the two groups of obese animals 5 wk following the last dose of MNU. The colonic mucosa of db/db mice expressed significantly lower mRNA levels of ObRa, the predominant short form of the leptin receptor, compared to ob/ob mice, and following i.p. injection with 1 mg/kg recombinant mouse leptin, exhibited significantly reduced p44/42 pMAPK compared to saline-treated controls. These results show that ObRa is functionally active in the colons of db/db mice. We conclude that leptin does not play a significant role in ACF development.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".