Neutrophils and Circulating Inflammatory Biomarkers in Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is characterized by low-grade chronic inflammation, which could be exacerbated by type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). We hypothesized that neutrophils in patients with DM and patients with HFpEF with/without DM contribute to low-grade inflammation through the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Venous blood was withdrawn from patients with DM (n = 22), HFpEF (n = 15), HFpEF with DM (n = 13), and healthy controls (CTL) (n = 21). Levels of circulating cytokines and in vitro cytokines released by isolated neutrophils were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Compared with CTL, there was a significant decrease in circulating nitric oxide in patients with DM (p ≤0.001), HFpEF (p ≤0.05), and HFpEF with DM (p ≤0.001) up to 44%. Circulating soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 levels increased (up to 2.5-fold and 1.9-fold, respectively; p ≤0.001) in patients with HFpEF and patients with HFpEF and DM, whereas soluble E-selectin only increased in patients with HFpEF and DM (1.4-fold, p ≤0.001). Circulating vascular endothelial growth factor levels were similar in CTL and patients with DM but were decreased in patients with HFpEF with/without DM (up to 94%; p ≤0.001). Circulating C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-8, IL-6, and IL-receptor antagonist increased in all patient groups with a maximum of 3.3-fold, 4.7-fold, 4.8-fold, and 1.6-fold, respectively, in patients with HFpEF and patients with DM. In vitro, lipopolysaccharide increased neutrophils IL-6 release from HFpEF with DM (3.7-fold; p ≤0.001), and IL-8 release from DM and HFpEF with DM versus CTL (2.8-fold and 10.1-fold, respectively; p ≤0.001). IL-1 receptor antagonist and vascular endothelial growth factor release from HFpEF neutrophils significantly decreased up to 87.0% and 92.2%, respectively, versus CTL. Neutrophils from patients with DM and HFpEF release more cytokines than CTL. This increase in pro-inflammatory status may explain the greater event rate in patients with HFpEF and DM.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".