Rosiglitazone decreases postprandial production of acylation stimulating protein in type 2 diabetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We evaluated plasma ASP and its precursor C3 in type 2 diabetic men with/without rosiglitazone (ROSI) treatment compared to healthy non-obese men. We tested (1) whether plasma ASP or C3 are altered postprandially in subcutaneous adipose tissue or forearm muscle effluent assessed by arteriovenous (A-V) differences in healthy lean men and older obese diabetic men and (2) whether treatment with ROSI changes the arteriovenous gradient of ASP and/or C3. METHODS: In this ongoing placebo-controlled, crossover, double-blinded study, AV differences following a mixed meal were measured in diabetic men (n = 6) as compared to healthy men (n = 9). RESULTS: Postprandial arterial and adipose venous TG and venous NEFA were increased in diabetics vs. controls (p < 0.05-0.0001). ROSI treatment decreased postprandial arterial TG (p < 0.001), adipose venous NEFA (p < 0.005), reduced postprandial glucose (p < 0.0001) and insulin concentrations (p < 0.006). In healthy men, there was no change in postprandial C3, but an increase in adipose venous ASP vs. arterial ASP (p < 0.02), suggesting ASP production, with no change in forearm muscle. In older, obese diabetic subjects, arterial C3 was greater than in controls (p < 0.001). Arterial C3 was greater than venous C3 (p < 0.05), an effect that was lost with ROSI treatment. In diabetics, postprandial venous ASP was greater than arterial (p < 0.05), indicating ASP production, an effect that was lost with ROSI treatment (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Increased postprandial venous production of ASP is specific for adipose tissue (absent in forearm muscle). Increased postprandial C3 and ASP in diabetic subjects is consistent with an ASP resistant state, this state is partially normalized by treatment with ROSI.
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) | 0.001 | 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".