Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 Is Independently Affected by Ethnicity, Insulin Sensitivity, and Leptin in Healthy, Glucose-Tolerant Young Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the relationships among IGF binding protein (IGFBP)-1, insulin sensitivity, and leptin in different ethnic groups (Asian Indians, Chinese, and Caucasians) using the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp. Ten healthy, young and nondiabetic subjects of each ethnic group, matched for body mass index, age, and physical activity were studied. A euglycemic clamp was performed on all subjects. IGFBP-1, insulin, and leptin were measured after fasting and during the clamp. Fasting IGFBP-1 concentration was highest in Chinese (P = 0.027). Asian Indians had the lowest insulin sensitivity index (P = 0.006). The ratio of insulin to IGFBP-1 at fasting and throughout the euglycemic clamp was higher in Asian Indians. Fasting IGFBP-1 had a strong negative correlation with fasting leptin levels (r = -0.715, P = 0.001). Multiple linear regression demonstrated that fasting insulin, leptin, ethnicity, and insulin sensitivity were significant predictors for fasting IGFBP-1. IGFBP-1 is independently determined by ethnicity, insulin sensitivity, and leptin in glucose-tolerant men. The presence of relative insulin resistance and low fasting IGFBP-1 levels in Asian Indians may contribute to their higher risk of developing diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
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 | 0.001 | 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".