MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390574865 · doi:10.1093/jbmrpl/ziad018

Advanced glycation end products are not associated with bone mineral density, trabecular bone score, and bone turnover markers in adults with and without type 1 diabetes: a cross-sectional study

2024· article· en· W4390574865 on OpenAlexafffund
Julie-Catherine Coll, Anne‐Frédérique Turcotte, William D. Leslie, Laëtitia Michou, S. John Weisnagel, Fabrice Mac‐Way, Caroline Albert, Claudie Berger, Suzanne N. Morin, Rémi Rabasa‐Lhoret, Claudia Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueJBMR Plus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Glycation End Products research
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research InstituteMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity of ManitobaUniversité Laval
FundersCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de QuébecNovo NordiskDiabetes CanadaEndocrine Fellows FoundationUniversité Laval
KeywordsPentosidineMedicineBone mineralSclerostinBone remodelingInternal medicineType 1 diabetesFemoral neckEndocrinologyInterquartile rangeOsteocalcinDiabetes mellitusGlycationOsteoporosisAlkaline phosphataseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is unclear if AGEs are involved in the bone fragility of type 1 diabetes (T1D). We evaluated whether skin AGEs by skin autofluorescence and serum AGEs (pentosidine, carboxymethyl-lysine [CML]) are independently associated with BMD by DXA (lumbar spine, hip, distal radius), trabecular bone score (TBS), serum bone turnover markers (BTMs: CTX; P1NP; osteocalcin), and sclerostin in participants with and without T1D. Linear regression models were used, with interaction terms to test effect modification by T1D status. In participants with T1D, correlations between skin and serum AGEs as well as between AGEs and 3-year HbA1C were evaluated using Spearman’s correlations. Data are mean ± SD or median (interquartile range). We included individuals who participated in a cross-sectional study and had BMD and TBS assessment (106 T1D/65 controls, 53.2% women, age 43 ± 15 yr, BMI 26.6 ± 5.5 kg/m2). Participants with T1D had diabetes for 27.6 ± 12.3 yr, a mean 3-yr HbA1C of 7.5 ± 0.9% and skin AGEs of 2.15 ± 0.54 arbitrary units. A subgroup of 65 T1D/57 controls had BTMs and sclerostin measurements, and those with T1D also had serum pentosidine (16.8[8.2–32.0] ng/mL) and CML [48.0 ± 16.8] ng/mL) measured. Femoral neck BMD, TBS, and BTMs were lower, while sclerostin levels were similar in participants with T1D vs controls. T1D status did not modify the associations between AGEs and bone outcomes. Skin AGEs were significantly associated with total hip and femoral neck BMD, TBS, BTMs, and sclerostin before, but not after, adjustment for confounders. Serum AGEs were not associated with any bone outcome. There were no significant correlations between skin and serum AGEs or between AGEs and 3-yr HbA1C. In conclusion, skin and serum AGEs are not independently associated with BMD, TBS, BTMs, and sclerostin in participants with relatively well-controlled T1D and participants without diabetes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBMR PlusSame topicAdvanced Glycation End Products researchFrench-language works237,207