Angiogenesis inhibition and depression in older men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases have been associated with depression in later life, and a potential mechanism is inhibition of angiogenesis. We designed this study to determine if depression is associated with higher serum concentration of endostatin, an endogenous angiogenesis inhibitor. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional examination of a random sample of men aged 69-86 years. Those who scored 7 or higher on the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale were deemed depressed. We determined the concentration of serum endostatin using a reproducible assay. Other measures included age, education, body mass index, smoking, history of depression, use of antidepressants, hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease and stroke, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, plasma homocysteine, triglycerides and cholesterol. We used logistic regression to investigate the association between endostatin and depression, and adjusted the analyses for confounding factors. RESULTS: Our sample included 1109 men. Sixty-three (5.7%) men were depressed. Their serum endostatin was higher than that of nondepressed participants (p = 0.021). Men in the highest decile of endostatin had greater adjusted odds of depression (odds ratio [OR] 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-3.06). A doubling of endostatin doubled the odds of depression (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.31-2.84). The probability of depression increased with the concentration of endostatin in a log-linear fashion up to a maximum of about 20%-25%. LIMITATIONS: The cross-sectional design limits the study's ability to ascribe causality to the association between high endostatin and depression. CONCLUSION: Serum endostatin is associated with depression in older men. It remains to be established whether correction of this imbalance is feasible and could decrease the prevalence of depression in later life.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".