9-OR: Insulin Resistance (IR) and Kidney Oxidative Metabolism in People with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IR has been linked to kidney injury in T1D. Animal models show that IR associates with impaired TCA cycle turnover and oxidative phosphorylation, collectively termed oxidative metabolism, but little is known about this relationship in humans with T1D. Thirty young adults with T1D (age: 23±3 years, diabetes duration: 13±5 years, 53% female, HbA1c: 7.9±1.1%, BMI: 25±3 kg/m2, UACR: 5 [3, 8] mg/g) and 20 healthy controls (HC) (age: 25±3, 50% female, HbA1c: 5.2±0.3%, BMI: 23±2 kg/m2, UACR: 5 [3, 9] mg/g) underwent hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps to assess whole-body insulin sensitivity (IS), and MRI to assess kidney perfusion. A subset underwent voxel-wise and region-of-interest (ROI) pharmacokinetic (PK) 11C-acetate PET analyses (n=16 T1D; n=10 HC) to quantify kidney cortical oxidative metabolism (k 2), and research kidney biopsies with single-cell RNA sequencing (n=28 T1D; n=13 HC). Compared to HC, participants with T1D exhibited lower IS (7.8±2.6 vs. 14.3±4.0 mg/kg/min, p<0.0001), cortical perfusion (196±68 vs. 243±46 ml/min/100g, p=0.01) and lower cortical k 2 (0.16±0.02 vs. HC 0.18±0.02 min-1, p=0.04) in voxel-wise models, although significance was not reached in the ROI PK analyses. IS associated with cortical k 2 (r:0.43, p=0.03) and the associations remained significant after adjusting for age, sex, and HbA1c (p=0.04). No significant interaction observed between T1D and HC for IS and cortical k2 (p=0.78). Proximal tubular transcripts of the enzymes catalyzing the proximal steps of the TCA cycle (e.g., ACO1, IDH1, SUCLG1) were lower in T1D vs. HC (all FDR-adjusted p<0.0001). Kidney oxidative metabolism is impaired in young people with T1D and is linked to lower whole-body IS. Statistical differences in k 2 from ROI and voxel-wise analyses suggest regional variations in kidney oxidative metabolism that may not be apparent in global analysis. Spatial metabolomic analyses of kidney tissue in a subset of these participants are shown in abstract #2023-A-3407-Diabetes. Disclosure G.Richard: None. S.Gross: None. V.N.Shah: Advisory Panel; LifeScan Diabetes Institute, Medscape, Consultant; DKSH, Research Support; Novo Nordisk, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, JDRF, National Institutes of Health, Speaker's Bureau; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation. L.Pyle: None. T.B.Vigers: None. J.K.Snell-bergeon: None. I.De boer: Advisory Panel; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., Bayer Inc., Consultant; George Clinical, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Medscape, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc. D.Van raalte: Consultant; Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, AstraZeneca, Merck & Co., Inc., Research Support; Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, AstraZeneca, Merck & Co., Inc. L.Li: None. P.V.Prasad: None. P.E.Ladd: None. C.Birznieks: None. B.B.Chin: None. D.Cherney: Other Relationship; Boehringer Ingelheim-Lilly, Merck, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Abbvie, Janssen, Bayer, Prometic, BMS, Maze, Gilead, CSL-Behring, Otsuka, Novartis, Youngene, Lexicon and Novo-Nordisk, Research Support; Boehringer Ingelheim-Lilly, Merck, Janssen, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, CSL-Behring and Novo-Nordisk. P.J.Mccown: None. F.Alakwaa: None. M.Kretzler: Research Support; Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim Inc., Traveere Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, certa, Chinook Therapeutics Inc., Janssen Research & Development, LLC, AstraZeneca, Moderna, Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc., Regeneron, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Angioin, Renalytix. K.Sharma: Advisory Panel; Reata Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc. F.C.Brosius: Advisory Panel; Gilead Sciences, Inc. R.G.Nelson: None. K.J.Nadeau: None. P.Bjornstad: Advisory Panel; AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Lilly, Horizon Therapeutics plc, Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd., LG Chem, Consultant; Bayer Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. G.Zhang: None. L.Driscoll: None. K.L.Tommerdahl: None. J.A.Schaub: None. A.Naik: Advisory Panel; CareDx. V.Nair: None. A.A.Macdonald: None. Funding JDRF; National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".