MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135617148 · doi:10.2337/diabetes.49.4.611

Effect of glucagon-like peptide 1(7-36) amide on glucose effectiveness and insulin action in people with type 2 diabetes.

2000· article· en· W2135617148 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Vella, Priyali Shah, Rita Basu, Ananda Basu, Jens J. Holst, R. A. Rizza

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsInternal medicineEndocrinologyInsulinGlucagonBasal (medicine)SalineSomatostatinGlucagon-like peptide-1Type 2 diabetesPancreatic hormoneDiabetes mellitusChemistryMedicineInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although it is well established that glucagon-like peptide 1(7-36) amide (GLP-1) is a potent stimulator of insulin secretion, its effects on insulin action and glucose effectiveness are less clear. To determine whether GLP-1 increases insulin action and glucose effectiveness, subjects with type 2 diabetes were studied on two occasions. Insulin was infused during the night on both occasions to ensure that baseline glucose concentrations were comparable. On the morning of study, either GLP-1 (1.2 pmol x kg(-1) x min(-1)) or saline were infused along with somatostatin and replacement amounts of glucagon. Glucose also was infused in a pattern mimicking that typically observed after a carbohydrate meal. Insulin concentrations were either kept constant at basal levels (n = 6) or varied so as to create a prandial insulin profile (n = 6). The increase in glucose concentration was virtually identical on the GLP-1 and saline study days during both the basal (1.21 +/- 0.15 vs. 1.32 +/- 0.19 mol/l per 6 h) and prandial (0.56 +/- 0.14 vs. 0.56 +/- 0.10 mol/l per 6 h) insulin infusions. During both the basal and prandial insulin infusions, glucose disappearance promptly increased after initiation of the glucose infusion to rates that did not differ on the GLP-1 and saline study days. Suppression of endogenous glucose production also was comparable on the GLP-1 and saline study days during both the basal (-2.7 +/- 0.3 vs. -3.1 +/- 0.2 micromol/kg) and prandial (-3.1 +/- 0.4 vs. -3.0 +/- 0.6 pmol/kg) insulin infusions. We conclude that when insulin and glucagon concentrations are matched, GLP-1 has negligible effects on either insulin action or glucose effectiveness in people with type 2 diabetes. These data strongly support the concept that GLP-1 improves glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes by increasing insulin secretion, by inhibiting glucagon secretion, and by delaying gastric emptying rather than by altering extrapancreatic glucose metabolism.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations120
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207