Circulating Irisin in Relation to Insulin Resistance and the Metabolic Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Irisin, a recently identified hormone, has been proposed to regulate energy homeostasis and obesity in mice. Whether irisin levels are associated with risk of the metabolic syndrome (MetS), cardiometabolic variables, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in humans remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess the associations between baseline serum irisin levels and MetS, cardiometabolic variables, and CVD risk. DESIGN, SETTING, AND SUBJECTS: We conducted a comparative cross-sectional evaluation of baseline circulating levels of the novel hormone irisin and the established adipokine adiponectin with MetS, cardiometabolic variables, and CVD risk in a sample of 151 subjects. RESULTS: Baseline irisin levels were significantly higher in subjects with MetS than in subjects without MetS. Irisin was associated negatively with adiponectin (r = -0.4, P < .001) and positively with body mass index (r = 0.22, P = .008), systolic (r = 0.17, P = .04) and diastolic (r = 0.27, P = .001) blood pressure, fasting glucose (r = 0.25, P = .002), triglycerides (r = 0.25, P = .003), and homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (r = 0.33, P < .001). After adjustment for potential confounders, including body mass index, subjects in the highest tertile of irisin levels were more likely to have MetS (odds ratio [OR] = 9.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.66-33.44), elevated fasting blood glucose (OR = 5.80, 95% CI = 1.72-19.60), high triglycerides (OR = 3.89, 95% CI = 1.16-13.03), and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (OR = 3.30, 95% CI = 1.18-9.20). Irisin was independently associated with homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance and general Framingham risk profile in multiple linear regression analyses after adjustment for confounders. Adiponectin demonstrated the expected associations with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Irisin is associated with increased risk of MetS, cardiometabolic variables, and CVD in humans, indicating either increased secretion by adipose/muscle tissue and/or a compensatory increase of irisin to overcome an underlying irisin resistance in these subjects.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".