Type 2 diabetes specifically attenuates purinergic skin vasodilatation without affecting muscarinic and nicotinic skin vasodilatation and sweating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NEW FINDINGS: What is the central question of this study? It remains to be determined whether type 2 diabetes attenuates muscarinic and nicotinic cutaneous vasodilatation and sweating as well as purinergic cutaneous vasodilatation. What is the main finding and its importance? We show that type 2 diabetes specifically attenuates purinergic cutaneous vasodilatation without influencing muscarinic and nicotinic cutaneous vasodilatation and sweating. Our results provide valuable new information regarding the receptor-specific influence of type 2 diabetes on microvascular and sudomotor function. ABSTRACT: The present study evaluated whether type 2 diabetes (T2D) attenuates muscarinic and/or nicotinic cutaneous vasodilatation and sweating as well as purinergic cutaneous vasodilatation. Cutaneous vascular conductance and sweat rate were evaluated in 12 healthy non-diabetic older adults (Control, 60 ± 8 years) and 13 older adults with T2D (62 ± 10 years) at three intradermal forearm skin sites perfused with the following: (i) methacholine (muscarinic receptor agonist, five doses: 0.0125, 0.25, 5, 100 and 2000 mm); (ii) nicotine (nicotinic receptor agonist, five doses: 1.2, 3.6, 11, 33 and 100 mm); or (iii) ATP (purinergic receptor agonist, five doses: 0.03, 0.3, 3, 30 and 300 mm). Each agonist was administered for 25 min per dose. At the end of the protocol, 50 mm sodium nitroprusside was administered to all skin sites to elicit maximal cutaneous vasodilatation. Cutaneous vascular conductance during methacholine and nicotine administration did not differ between groups (all P > 0.05). In contrast, cutaneous vascular conductance during administration of 30 mm (42 ± 28 versus 63 ± 26% maximum, P ≤ 0.05) and 300 mm ATP (56 ± 24 versus 71 ± 20% maximum, P ≤ 0.05) was attenuated in individuals with T2D in comparison to the Control participants. Furthermore, cutaneous vascular conductance during administration of 50 mm sodium nitroprusside was lower in individuals with T2D relative to Control subjects (P = 0.04). Methacholine- and nicotine-induced sweating was similar between groups (all P > 0.05). Thus, T2D attenuates purinergic cutaneous vasodilatation without affecting muscarinic and nicotinic cutaneous vascular and sweating responses.
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".