MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143600611 · doi:10.1177/193229681300700610

Pharmacokinetics of Insulin Aspart and Glucagon in Type 1 Diabetes during Closed-Loop Operation

2013· article· en· W2143600611 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Haidar, C. Duval, Laurent Legault, Rémi Rabasa‐Lhoret

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Diabetes Science and Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's HospitalMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Clinical Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsulin aspartMedicinePharmacokineticsInsulinType 1 diabetesHypoglycemiaArtificial pancreasDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesGlucagonClosed loopEndocrinologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We assessed the pharmacokinetics of subcutaneous insulin aspart and glucagon during closed-loop operation and their relationship with body composition variables. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data collected from closed-loop experiments in 15 type 1 diabetes patients (age 47.1 ± 12.3 years, body mass index 25.9 ± 4.6 kg/m², glycated hemoglobin 7.9% ± 0.7%). Patients received an evening meal accompanied with prandial insulin bolus and stayed in the clinical facility until the next morning. Glucose levels were regulated by dual-hormone closed-loop delivery. Insulin and glucagon were delivered using two subcutaneous infusion pumps installed on the abdominal wall. Plasma insulin and glucagon were measured every 10-30 min. Percentage of body fat, percentage of fat in the abdominal area, and mass of abdominal fat were measured by dual X-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS: A pharmacokinetic model estimated time-to-peak plasma concentrations [t(max) insulin 51 (19) min, t(max) glucagon 19 (4) min, mean (standard deviation)], metabolic clearance rate [MCR insulin 0.019 (0.015-0.026) liter/kg/min, MCR glucagon 0.012 (0.010-0.014) liter/kg/min, median (interquartile range)], and the background plasma concentrations [I(b) insulin 10.2 (6.3-15.2) mU/liter, I(b) glucagon 50 (45-56) pg/ml, median (interquartile range)]. t(max) correlated positively between insulin and glucagon (r = 0.7; p = .007) while MCR correlated negatively (r = -0.7; p = .015). In this small sample size, t(max), MCR, and I(b) of insulin and glucagon did not correlate with percentage of body fat, percentage of fat in the abdominal area, or total mass of abdominal fat. CONCLUSIONS: Insulin and glucagon pharmacokinetics might be related during closed-loop operation. Our data suggest that slower absorption of insulin is associated with slower absorption of glucagon. Body composition does not seem to influence insulin and glucagon pharmacokinetics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations30
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Diabetes Science and TechnologySame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207