MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240193222 · doi:10.1210/en.143.4.1213

Sciatic Nerve Lipoprotein Lipase Is Reduced in Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetes and Corrected by Insulin

2002· article· en· W4240193222 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Luis D. Ferreira

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrinology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Diabetes Association
KeywordsSciatic nerveEndocrinologyInternal medicineLipoprotein lipaseStreptozotocinInsulinDiabetes mellitusDiabetic neuropathyMedicineMyelinCentral nervous systemAdipose tissue

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The metabolic abnormalities underlying the cause of diabetic neuropathy have been the subject of much debate. Lipoprotein lipase (LPL) is a 56-kDa enzyme produced by several tissues in the body and has recently been shown in vitro to be expressed in cultured Schwann cells, where it is important in phospholipid synthesis. This suggests a role for LPL in myelin biosynthesis in the peripheral nervous system. The aim of this study was to determine if acute streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes reduces the expression and regulation of sciatic nerve LPL in vivo. Adult Sprague Dawley rats were rendered diabetic via an sc injection of STZ. A decrease in sciatic nerve LPL activity was observed in the STZ-treated rats after just 2 d of diabetes and remained significantly reduced for at least 35 d. The decrease in LPL activity coincided temporally with a drop in motor nerve conduction velocity. Treatment with insulin for 4 d showed a normalization of sciatic nerve LPL activity. These results show that STZ-induced diabetes causes a decrease in LPL activity in the sciatic nerve that, as in other tissues, is reversible with insulin treatment. These data may suggest a role for LPL in the pathophysiology of diabetic neuropathy.

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 score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndocrinologySame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207