Hyperinsulinemia, But Not Other Factors Associated with Insulin Resistance, Acutely Enhances Colorectal Epithelial Proliferation in Vivo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The similarity in risk factors for insulin resistance and colorectal cancer (CRC) led to the hypothesis that markers of insulin resistance, such as elevated circulating levels of insulin, glucose, fatty acids, and triglycerides, are energy sources and growth factors in the development of CRC. The objective was thus to examine the individual and combined effects of these circulating factors on colorectal epithelial proliferation in vivo. Rats were fasted overnight, randomized to six groups, infused iv with insulin, glucose, and/or Intralipid for 10 h, and assessed for 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine labeling of replicating DNA in colorectal epithelial cells. Intravenous infusion of insulin, during a 10-h euglycemic clamp, increased colorectal epithelial proliferation in a dose-dependent manner. The addition of hyperglycemia to hyperinsulinemia did not further increase proliferation. Intralipid infusion alone did not affect proliferation; however, the combination of insulin, glucose, and Intralipid infusion resulted in greater hyperinsulinemia than the infusion of insulin alone and further increased proliferation. Insulin infusion during a 10-h euglycemic clamp decreased total IGF-I levels and did not affect insulin sensitivity. These results provide evidence for an acute role of insulin, at levels observed in insulin resistance, in the proliferation of colorectal epithelial cells in vivo.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".