Circulating IGF-I levels in monitoring and predicting efficacy during long-term GH treatment of GH-deficient adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of long-term GH in GH-deficient adults, as predicted by IGF-I levels. METHODS: Patients received GH, 5 microg/kg per day for 1 Month and 10 microg/kg per day for another 12-30 Months. Changes in body composition, cardiac structure/function, serum lipids and quality of life were measured. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in lean body mass (LBM) (2.21 kg; P<0.0001) after 6 Months, which was sustained throughout treatment. A larger increase occurred in males than females (2.97 vs 1.19 kg; P<0.0001). Total fat mass was reduced (2.56 kg; P<0.0001 (3.26 kg males, 1.63 kg females)). Responsiveness to GH varied greatly, but LBM changes correlated with IGF-I changes (P<0.004). Furthermore, thinner patients experienced greater and progressive LBM increases. There was an increase in ejection fraction (3.85+/-9.95%; P=0.0002) after 6 Months, sustained to 18 Months. These cardiac effects were equal for males and females, and did not correlate with IGF-I levels. Serum low-density lipoprotein/high-density lipoprotein ratios decreased within 6 Months, and were sustained thereafter. Quality of life improved significantly after 6 Months, an effect that was sustained/enhanced as treatment continued. No major adverse events were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Improved body composition is both reflected by IGF-I changes and predicted inversely by baseline adiposity. Other effects of GH replacement on cardiac function, dyslipidaemia and quality of life, however, do not correlate with circulating IGF-I concentrations. Our findings validate the importance of sustained GH therapy, but caution on the interpretation of IGF-I levels in monitoring the long-term effects of GH treatment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".