Somatotroph Responsiveness to Low Dose Dopamine Infusion in Normal Subjects and Acromegalic Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have investigated the effects of intravenous administration of a low dose of dopamine (DA) on plasma growth hormone (GH) concentrations in acromegalic patients and normal subjects with the aim of defining the somatotroph responsiveness to peripheral (i.e., outside the blood-brain barrier) specific dopaminergic stimuli. DA (0.02 micrograms/kg/min) was infused for 180 min into 12 acromegalic patients and 10 normal subjects. DA infusion discriminated between two groups of acromegalics. In group I (n = 7), the elevated plasma GH levels (64.1 +/- 29.9 ng/ml, mean basal value +/- SEM) decreased significantly (mean overall GH inhibition, 26% reduction from basal levels; range, 10-49), whereas in group II (n = 5) plasma GH levels (29.8 +/- 12.5 ng/ml) remained elevated (mean GH variation, 8% above baseline; range, 0-15). Plasma GH concentrations showed a significant rebound above baseline values after stopping DA infusion only in group I. In contrast, the responsiveness to TRH was not significantly different between the groups (percentage increase 767 +/- 317% in group I vs. 382 +/- 210% in group II) and they were also comparable with regard to sex, age, glucose tolerance, plasma prolactin (PRL) concentrations and adenoma size. However, the mean duration of the disease was significantly (p less than 0.02) longer in group I (12.8 +/- 2.6 years) than in group II (4.5 +/- 1.5 years). Further, 3 patients with previous radiotherapy for invasive adenomas were nonresponders to DA. In normal subjects, DA infusion had no significant effect on plasma GH levels. It is concluded that: somatotroph responsiveness to DA is not a constant feature of acromegaly.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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".