Vildagliptin/pioglitazone combination improved the overall glycemic control in type I diabetic rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type I diabetes (TID) is generally assumed to be caused by an immune associated, if not directly immune-mediated, destruction of pancreatic β-cells. In patients with long-term diabetes, the pancreas lacks insulin-producing cells and the residual β-cells are unable to regenerate. Patients with TID are subjected to a lifelong insulin therapy which shows risks of hypoglycemia, suboptimal control and ketosis. In this study, we investigated the potential role of vildagliptin (Vilda) alone or in combination with pioglitazone (Pio), as treatment regimens for TID using streptozotocin (STZ)-induced TID model in rats. Daily oral administration of Vilda (5 mg/kg) alone or in combination with Pio (20 mg/kg) for 7 weeks significantly reduced blood glucose levels and HbA1c. It increased serum insulin levels and decreased serum glucagon. It also showed a strong antioxidant activity. Immunohistochemical analysis showed a marked improvement in β-cells in treated groups when compared with the diabetic group, which appeared in the normal cellular and architecture restoration of β-cells in the islets of Langerhans. Vilda alone or in combination with Pio has the ability to improve the overall glycemic control in type I diabetic rats and may be considered a hopeful and effective remedy for TID.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".