The intra‐individual stability of GH biomarkers IGF‐I and P‐III‐NP in relation to GHRH administration, menstrual cycle, and hematological parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intra-individual stability of growth hormone (GH) biomarkers IGF-I, P-III-NP, calculated GH-2000 score in relation to growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) (Somatorelin) administration, menstrual cycle, and hematological parameters were investigated in four men and eight women, respectively. Moreover, the hematological parameters hemoglobin (Hb) and percentage of reticulocyte (RET%) were statistically analyzed in relation to the GH biomarker parameters for the GHRH administration study and the menstrual cycle study. Longitudinal monitoring of IGF-I and/or GH-2000 score proved to be a viable approach to detect the GHRH intake in men, as all four participants show values above individually calculated thresholds (calculated as mean ± 3SD from three baseline samples). The intra-individual variation for IGF-I, P-III-NP, and calculated GH-2000 score in women, over two consecutive menstrual cycles, was investigated and established to be higher (coefficients variations [CVs] between 12% and 186%) than in men (CVs between 3% and 12%). The GHRH administration did not influence the hematological parameters. A strong positive correlation between Hb and IGF-I (Rs = 0.73, p < 0.0001) and a borderline weak correlation between RET% and IGF-I (Rs = 0.28, p = 0.054) were noticed in the women. No correlation for the P-III-NP and the hematological parameters was seen for the females in the menstrual cycle study. The results fortify previous studies that longitudinal monitoring of IGF-I and/or GH-2000 score may be a promising method to detect doping with GH and GH stimulating agents in men, whereas the large intra-individual variation noted in women indicates that longitudinal monitoring of these biomarker may be harder to evaluate in women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".