Renal Hyperfiltration and Arterial Stiffness in Humans With Uncomplicated Type 1 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We have reported that renal hyperfiltration is associated with endothelial dysfunction in early type 1 diabetes. However, the relationship between renal hyperfiltration and arterial stiffness is unknown. Accordingly, we measured arterial stiffness in type 1 diabetic subjects with hyperfiltering (n = 20) or normofiltering (n = 18). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Augmentation index (AIx), aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV), renal hemodynamic function (inulin and paraaminohippurate clearances), and urinary and circulating plasma cGMP were measured in normoalbuminuric subjects with type 1 diabetes during clamped euglycemia (glucose 4-6 mmol/l) and hyperglycemia (glucose 9-11 mmol/l). RESULTS: During clamped euglycemia, hyperfiltering subjects (glomerular filtration rate >or=135 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) exhibited lower AIx values (-6.1 +/- 2.9 vs. 13.9 +/- 2.7%, P = 0.001) and higher cGMP levels in urine and plasma compared with normofiltering subjects. These differences were maintained during clamped hyperglycemia. As expected, renal hemodynamic responses to clamped hyperglycemia were exaggerated in normofilterers, but values for AIx remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Renal hyperfiltration is associated with reduced arterial stiffness in subjects with uncomplicated type 1 diabetes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".