Acute and Chronic Effects of Glyceryl Trinitrate Therapy on Insulin and Glucose Regulation in Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effect of acute and sustained transdermal glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) therapy on insulin and glucose regulation. Totally, 12 males (18-30 years) underwent a glucose tolerance test at baseline (visit 1), 90 minutes after acute transdermal GTN 0.6 mg/h (visit 2), following 7 days of continuous GTN (visit 3), and 2 to 3 days after stopping GTN (visit 4). At each visit, plasma glucose and insulin concentrations were measured before and 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes after a 75-g oral glucose load. Indices of glucose metabolism that were examined included the insulin sensitivity index, the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), and the insulinogenic index. The acute administration of GTN had no effect on glucose and insulin responses (visit 2). However, after 7 days of GTN exposure (visit 3) there was an increase in the mean glucose concentration measured after the oral glucose load. On visit 1, the mean glucose concentration (± standard deviation) following the 75 g oral glucose challenge was 5.7 ± 0.5 µmol/L. On visit 3, after 7 days of transdermal GTN therapy, the mean glucose concentration after the oral glucose was significantly higher; 6.2 ± 0.5 µmol/L (P < .015; 95% confidence intervals 0.25-0.77). There was also an increase in the HOMA-IR index; on visit 1, the median HOMA-IR (interquartile range) was 5.2 (3.9) versus 6.9 (6.8) on visit 3 (P < .015). Other indices of glucose metabolism did not change. These observations document that GTN therapy modifies glucose metabolism causing evidence of increased insulin resistance during sustained therapy in normal humans.
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) | 0.000 | 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".