GDF15 promotes weight loss by enhancing energy expenditure in muscle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Caloric restriction that promotes weight loss is an effective strategy for treating non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and improving insulin sensitivity in people with type 2 diabetes 1 . Despite its effectiveness, in most individuals, weight loss is usually not maintained partly due to physiological adaptations that suppress energy expenditure, a process known as adaptive thermogenesis, the mechanistic underpinnings of which are unclear 2,3 . Treatment of rodents fed a high-fat diet with recombinant growth differentiating factor 15 (GDF15) reduces obesity and improves glycaemic control through glial-cell-derived neurotrophic factor family receptor α-like (GFRAL)-dependent suppression of food intake 4–7 . Here we find that, in addition to suppressing appetite, GDF15 counteracts compensatory reductions in energy expenditure, eliciting greater weight loss and reductions in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) compared to caloric restriction alone. This effect of GDF15 to maintain energy expenditure during calorie restriction requires a GFRAL–β-adrenergic-dependent signalling axis that increases fatty acid oxidation and calcium futile cycling in the skeletal muscle of mice. These data indicate that therapeutic targeting of the GDF15–GFRAL pathway may be useful for maintaining energy expenditure in skeletal muscle during caloric restriction.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".