MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097956157 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2015.00260

Study of GABA in Healthy Volunteers: Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics

2015· article· en· W2097956157 on OpenAlexaff
Junfeng Li, Zhaoyun Zhang, Xiaoxia Liu, Yi Wang, Fei Mao, Junjun Mao, Xiaolan Lu, Dongdong Jiang, Yun Wan, Jia-Ying Lv, Guoying Cao, Jing Zhang, Naiqing Zhao, Mark A. Atkinson, Dale L. Greiner, Gérald J. Prud’homme, Zheng Jiao, Yiming Li, Qinghua Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersHuashan HospitalNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaJuvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International
KeywordsPharmacokineticsMedicineDosingPharmacodynamicsPlaceboInternal medicineOral administrationAdverse effectPharmacologyEndocrinologyGlucagonInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preclinical studies show that GABA exerts anti-diabetic effects in rodent models of type 1 diabetes. Because little is known about its absorption and effects in humans, we investigated the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of GABA in healthy volunteers. Twelve subjects were subjected to an open-labeled, three-period trial involving sequential oral administration of placebo, 2 g GABA once, and 2 g GABA three times/day for 7 days, with a 7-day washout between each period. GABA was rapidly absorbed (Tmax: 0.5 ~ 1 h) with the half-life (t1/2) of 5 h. No accumulation was observed after repeated oral GABA administration for 7 days. Remarkably, GABA significantly increased circulating insulin levels in the subjects under either fasting (1.6-fold, single dose; 2.0-fold, repeated dose; p < 0.01) or fed conditions (1.4-fold, single dose; 1.6-fold, repeated dose; p < 0.01). GABA also increased glucagon levels only under fasting conditions (1.3-fold, single dose, p < 0.05; 1.5-fold, repeated dose, p < 0.01). However, there were no significant differences in the insulin-to-glucagon ratio and no significant change in glucose levels in these healthy subjects during the study period. Importantly, GABA significantly decreased glycated albumin levels in the repeated dosing period. Subjects with repeated dosing showed an elevated incidence of minor adverse events in comparison to placebo or the single dosing period, most notably transient discomforts such as dizziness and sore throat. However, there were no serious adverse events observed throughout the study. Our data show that GABA is rapidly absorbed and tolerated in human beings; its endocrine effects, exemplified by increasing islet hormonal secretion, suggest potential therapeutic benefits for diabetes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations84
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207