Relationship Between Angiopoietin-Like Protein 8 and Fasting Serum Triglyceride Level
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate the correlation between angiopoietin-like protein 8 (ANGPTL8) and metabolic parameters in non-diabetic healthy humans. METHODS: We enrolled 30 healthy Japanese adults (25 men and five women). After 9 h of fasting, we collected blood samples and analyzed the ANGPTL8, lipoprotein lipase (LPL), plasma lipid and glucose metabolic parameters. In addition, we performed 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and measured adipokines (tumor necrosis factor-α, leptin and adiponectin). RESULTS: Median serum ANGPTL8 level was 224 (167 - 437) pg/mL, and serum ANGPTL8 level positively correlated with serum triglyceride level (r = 0.42, P = 0.021) and negatively correlated with LPL level (r = -0.44, P = 0.015). ANGPTL8 level showed no correlation with body mass index (BMI), waist-hip ratio, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) or with adipose tissue-derived adiponectin and leptin levels. Further, ANGPTL8 showed no association with glucose and insulin levels after 75-g OGTT. CONCLUSION: Serum ANGPTL8 level negatively correlated with LPL levels in healthy Japanese adults. Regulation of ANGPTL8 could be a promising therapeutic target for hypertriglyceridemia.
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".