Proteomic predictors of individualized nutrient-specific insulin secretion in health and disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population level variation and molecular mechanisms behind insulin secretion in response to carbohydrate, protein, and fat remain uncharacterized despite ramifications for personalized nutrition. Here, we define prototypical insulin secretion dynamics in response to the three macronutrients in islets from 140 cadaveric donors, including those diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. While islets from the majority of donors exhibited the expected relative response magnitudes, with glucose being highest, amino acid moderate, and fatty acid small, 9% of islets stimulated with amino acid and 8% of islets stimulated with fatty acids had larger responses compared with high glucose. We leveraged this insulin response heterogeneity and used transcriptomics and proteomics to identify molecular correlates of specific nutrient responsiveness, as well as those proteins and mRNAs altered in type 2 diabetes. We also examine nutrient-responsiveness in stem cell-derived islet clusters and observe that they have dysregulated fuel sensitivity, which is a hallmark of functionally immature cells. Our study now represents the first comparison of dynamic responses to nutrients and multi-omics analysis in human insulin secreting cells. Responses of different people's islets to carbohydrate, protein, and fat lay the groundwork for personalized nutrition. ONE-SENTENCE SUMMARY: Deep phenotyping and multi-omics reveal individualized nutrient-specific insulin secretion propensity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".