MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041493832 · doi:10.14814/phy2.14500

Muscle and serum myostatin expression in type 1 diabetes

2020· article· en· W3041493832 on OpenAlexafffund
Athan G. Dial, Cynthia M. F. Monaco, Grace K. Grafham, Nadya Romanova, Jeremy A. Simpson, Mark A. Tarnopolsky, Christopher G. R. Perry, Evangelia Kalaitzoglou, Thomas J. Hawke

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphYork UniversityMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJames H. Cummings Foundation
KeywordsMyostatinDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesInternal medicineMedicineEndocrinologyBioinformaticsBiologySkeletal muscle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) has been reported to negatively affect the health of skeletal muscle, though the underlying mechanisms are unknown. Myostatin, a myokine whose increased expression is associated with muscle-wasting diseases, has not been reported in humans with T1D but has been demonstrated to be elevated in preclinical diabetes models. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine if there is an elevated expression of myostatin in the serum and skeletal muscle of persons with T1D compared to controls. Secondarily, we aimed to explore relationships between myostatin expression and clinically important metrics (e.g., HbA1c, strength, lean mass) in women and men with (N = 31)/without T1D (N = 24) between 18 and 72 years old. Body composition, baseline strength, blood sample and vastus lateralis muscle biopsy were evaluated. Serum, but not muscle, myostatin expression was significantly elevated in those with T1D versus controls, and to a greater degree in T1D women than T1D men. Serum myostatin levels were not significantly associated with HbA1c nor disease duration. A significant correlation between serum myostatin expression and maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) and body fat mass was demonstrated in control subjects, but these correlations did not reach significance in those with T1D (MVC: R = 0.64 controls vs. R = 0.37 T1D; Body fat: R = −0.52 controls/R = −0.02 T1D). Collectively, serum myostatin was correlated with lean mass (R = 0.45), and while this trend was noted in both groups separately, neither reached statistical significance (R = 0.47 controls/R = 0.33 T1D). Overall, while those with T1D exhibited elevated serum myostatin levels (particularly females) myostatin expression was not correlated with clinically relevant metrics despite some of these relationships existing in controls (e.g., lean/fat mass). Future studies will be needed to fully understand the mechanisms underlying increased myostatin in T1D, with relationships to insulin dosing being particularly important to elucidate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ReportsSame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207