Insulin resistance of protein anabolism accompanies that of glucose metabolism in lean, glucose-tolerant offspring of persons with type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To test whether protein anabolic resistance is an early defect in type 2 diabetes (T2D). Research design and methods Seven lean, normoglycemic T2D offspring (T2D-O) and eight matched participants without family history (controls; C) underwent a 3-hour hyperinsulinemic (40 mU/m 2 /min), euglycemic (5.5 mmol/L) and isoaminoacidemic clamp. Whole-body glucose and protein kinetics were measured with d -[3– 3 H]glucose and l -[l- 13 C]leucine, respectively. Plasma amino acids were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Results Fasting glycemia and glucose kinetic variables did not differ between groups. Clamp decreases in glucose rate of appearance were not different, but rate of disappearance increased 29% less in T2D-O, to a significantly lower rate. Fasting leucine was higher in T2D-O, but kinetics did not differ. Clamp increases in leucine oxidation and decreases in endogenous rate of appearance (protein breakdown) were equal, but in T2D-O, non-oxidative rate of disappearance (protein synthesis) did not increase and net balance (synthesis—breakdown) did not become positive as in C. Conclusions Resistance of whole-body protein anabolism (synthesis and net balance) accompanies resistance of glucose uptake in T2D-O. Mechanisms responsible, possible roles in the increased risk of developing diabetes, and its potential impact on long-term protein balance require definition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".