A non-invasive <sup>13</sup>CO<sub>2</sub> breath test detects differences in anabolic sensitivity with feeding and heavy resistance exercise in healthy young males: a randomized control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are limited tools to measure anabolic sensitivity non-invasively in response to acute physiological stimuli, which represents a challenge for research in free-living settings and vulnerable populations. We tested the ability of a stable isotope breath test to detect changes in leucine oxidation (OX) and leucine retention (intake–OX) across a range of anabolic sensitivities. Healthy males ingested a beverage containing 0.25 g·kg −1 protein and 0.75 g·kg −1 carbohydrate with the leucine content enriched to 5% with l-[1- 13 C]leucine at rest (FED) or after a bout of resistance exercise (EXFED), with a parallel group consuming only the tracer (FAST). Concurrent primed-constant infusions of l-[5,5,5- 2 H 3 ]leucine revealed high peripheral bioavailability for FED (∼81%), EXFED (∼80%), and FAST (∼117%). After beverage ingestion, whole-body protein synthesis was greater in FED and EXFED than FAST. OX was greater in FED and EXFED than FAST, with OX lower in EXFED than FED. Leucine retention demonstrated expected physiological differences in anabolic sensitivity (EXFED > FED > FAST). We demonstrated that a non-invasive breath test based on an amino acid (leucine) that is preferentially metabolized in peripheral (muscle) tissues can detect differences in anabolic sensitivity. Future studies could examine this test within a variety of populations experiencing muscle growth or atrophy. This study was registered as a Clinical Trial at ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT04887727). Novelty: An oral l-[1- 13 C]leucine breath test can detect greater anabolic sensitivity after feeding and resistance exercise. This tool may be applied in growing (e.g., children) or wasting (e.g., aging) populations where invasive procedures are not possible.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".