MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205423256 · doi:10.1111/dom.14652

<scp>ZT</scp> ‐01: A novel somatostatin receptor 2 antagonist for restoring the glucagon response to hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes

2022· article· en· W4205423256 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Obesity and Metabolism · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsiCo Therapeutics (Canada)York University
FundersLeona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable TrustJuvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International
KeywordsGlucagonType 1 diabetesSomatostatinAntagonistReceptor antagonistHypoglycemiaGlucagon-like peptide 1 receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and efficacy of a novel somatostatin receptor 2 antagonist, ZT-01, to stimulate glucagon release in rats with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: The pharmacokinetics of ZT-01 and PRL-2903 were assessed following intraperitoneal or subcutaneous dosing at 10 mg/kg. We compared the efficacy of ZT-01 with PRL-2903 to prevent hypoglycaemia during an insulin bolus challenge and under hypoglycaemic clamp conditions. RESULTS: Within 1 hour after intraperitoneal administration, ZT-01 achieved more than 10-fold higher plasma Cmax compared with PRL-2903. Twenty-four hour exposure was 4.7× and 11.3× higher with ZT-01 by the intraperitoneal and subcutaneous routes, respectively. The median time to reach hypoglycaemia of more than 3.0 mmol/L was 60, 70, and 125 minutes following vehicle, PRL-2903, or ZT-01 administration, respectively. Furthermore, rats receiving ZT-01 had significantly higher glucose nadirs following insulin administration compared with PRL-2903- and vehicle-treated rats. During the hypoglycaemic clamp, ZT-01 increased peak glucagon responses by ~4-fold over PRL-2903. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that ZT-01 may be effective in restoring glucagon responses and preventing the onset of hypoglycaemia in patients with T1D.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Obesity and MetabolismSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207