Short-Term Estradiol Supplementation Potentiates Low-Dose Ghrelin Action in the Presence of GHRH or Somatostatin in Older Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Ghrelin is a potent gastric-derived GH-releasing peptide. How ghrelin interacts with sex steroids, GHRH, and somatostatin (SS) is not known. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to test the hypotheses that ghrelin's interactions with GHRH (synergistic) and SS (disinhibitory) are ghrelin dose-dependent and amplified by estrogen. SUBJECTS, SETTING, AND DESIGN: Healthy postmenopausal women were treated with placebo (n=12) or 17β-estradiol (E2) (n=12) at the Center for Translational Science Activities in a randomized double-blind prospective study. METHODS: Ghrelin dose-dependence was assessed by nonlinear curve fitting of the relationship between deconvolved GH secretory-burst mass and 5 randomly ordered ghrelin doses (0, 0.03, 0.135, 0.6, and 2.7 μg/kg bolus iv) during saline, GHRH, and SS infusion. RESULTS: Under placebo, neither GHRH nor SS altered the ED50 of ghrelin (range 0.64-0.67 μg/kg). Under E2 (median E2 88 pg/mL), the ED50 of ghrelin declined in the presence of GHRH to 0.52 μg/kg. In contrast, the efficacy of ghrelin rose markedly during GHRH vs saline exposure with and without E2: placebo and saline 52±1.0 vs GHRH 173±3.8 μg/L; and E2 and saline 56±0.90 vs GHRH 174±3.7 μg/L. Sensitivity to ghrelin was similar under all conditions. SUMMARY: Short-term E2 supplementation in postmenopausal women reduces the ED50 (increases the potency) of ghrelin when GHRH is present, without altering ghrelin efficacy (maximal effect) or hypothalamo-pituitary sensitivity (slope of dose response) to ghrelin. The data suggest possible physiological interactions among sex steroids (endogenous), ghrelin, and GHRH during E2 replacement in postmenopausal women.
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".