Metabolic effects of telmisartan in subjects with abdominal obesity: A prospective randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND. Abdominal obesity, characterized by ectopic fat deposition in skeletal muscle and liver tissue, has been associated with insulin resistance and increased risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether treatment with the angiotensin II type 1 (AT-1) receptor blocker telmisartan can reduce intramyocellular lipid (IMCL) and hepatic fat storage, thereby improving insulin sensitivity among individuals with abdominal obesity. METHODS. Ninety-five adults with abdominal obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m(2) and waist circumference > 102 cm in men and > 88 cm in women) were randomized to double-blind treatment with telmisartan or placebo for 24 weeks. Following 4 weeks of 80 mg telmisartan per day, the dose was increased to 160 mg telmisartan for the duration of the study. Soleus muscle IMCL and liver fat content were assessed by (1)H-magnetic resonance imaging ((1)H-MRI) spectroscopy. Secondary outcomes included changes in body composition, plasma lipids, glucose profiles, insulin sensitivity, beta-cell function and total adiponectin levels. RESULTS. There was no significant effect of telmisartan in abdominally obese individuals consuming either a low or high glycemic diet, on IMCL content (5.73 ± 1.11 vs 6.11 ± 1.11; p = 0.13) or liver fat (0.08 ± 0.05 vs 0.09 ± 0.05; p = 0.60). Body composition, lipid and glucose profiles, insulin sensitivity and adiponectin were likewise unaffected. Beta-cell function, as determined by the insulinogenic index (IGI), improved significantly (19.3 ± 13.7 vs 22.5 ± 17.6; p = 0.03; 16.5% increase from baseline in the telmisartan group). CONCLUSIONS. Telmisartan increased beta-cell function but did not decrease IMCL or liver fat content or other metabolic parameters among individuals with abdominal obesity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".