Glucose transporter type 2 (GLUT2) genotype is associated with higher intakes of sugars in two distinct populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glucose transporter type 2 (GLUT2) has been implicated in impaired control of feeding in GLUT2‐null mice, however, its role in food intake regulation in humans is unknown. Our objective was to determine whether a genetic variation in GLUT2 (Thr110Ile) affects food intake among two distinct populations. In the first population, carriers of the Ile allele had a higher intake of sugars as assessed using 3‐day food records administered on two separate visits (visit 1: 112 ± 9 vs 86 ± 4 g/d, p=0.01; and visit 2: 111 ± 8 vs 82 ± 4 g/d, p=0.003), demonstrating within‐population reproducibility. In a second population, carriers of the Ile allele reported consuming a greater intake of sugars over a one‐month period as measured using a food frequency questionnaire (131 ± 5 vs 115 ± 3 g/d, p=0.007), and the higher consumption of sugars was proportional to the number of Ile alleles. These observations were consistent across older and younger adults as well as among subjects with mild type 2 diabetes and healthy individuals. Taken together, our findings show that a genetic variation in GLUT2 affects habitual consumption of sugars, suggesting an underlying glucose‐sensing mechanism that regulates food intake. Supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Advanced Foods & Materials Network.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".