The Association Between IGF-I and IGFBP-3 and Incident Diabetes in an Older Population of Men and Women in the Cardiovascular Health Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) has structural and functional similarities to insulin and may play a role in glucose homeostasis, along with insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3), which binds the majority of circulating IGF-I. Objective: To assess whether IGF-I and IGFBP-3 are associated with a higher risk of incident diabetes in older adults. Design: Participants in the Cardiovascular Health Study (n = 3133), a cohort of adults aged ≥65 years, were observed for 16 years (n = 3133) for the development of incident diabetes. Statistical models were fit separately for men and women because of interactions with sex (P interaction: IGF-I, 0.02; IGFBP-3, 0.009) and were adjusted for relevant covariates. Setting: General community. Participants: Older adults who were nondiabetic at baseline and who did not develop diabetes within the first year of follow-up. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure: Incident diabetes as measured by fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥126 mg/dL, non-FPG ≥200 mg/dL, use of pharmacological treatment of diabetes, or existence of two or more inpatient or three or more outpatient or (at least one inpatient and at least one outpatient) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims with the diagnostic International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code of 250.xx. Results: In women, higher IGFBP-3 (hazard ratio tertile 3 vs tertile 1 = 2.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.55 to 3.40; P trend < 0.0001) was significantly associated with incident diabetes. Total IGF-I was not significantly associated with incident diabetes. In men, neither IGF-I nor IGFBP-3 was significantly associated with incident diabetes. Conclusions: We confirmed a previously reported association between circulating IGFBP-3 and diabetes risk in the older adult population, establishing that this association is present among women but could not be shown to be associated in men.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".