MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391314181 · doi:10.3390/genes15020183

The Impact of Psilocybin on High Glucose/Lipid-Induced Changes in INS-1 Cell Viability and Dedifferentiation

2024· article· en· W4391314181 on OpenAlexafffund
Esmaeel Ghasemi Gojani, Bo Wang, Dongping Li, Olga Kovalchuk, Igor Kovalchuk

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersMitacs
KeywordsPsilocybinViability assayCell biologyHallucinogenChemistryBiologyCellPharmacologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Serotonin emerges as a pivotal factor influencing the growth and functionality of β-cells. Psilocybin, a natural compound derived from mushrooms of the Psilocybe genus, exerts agonistic effects on the serotonin 5-HT2A and 5-HT2B receptors, thereby mimicking serotonin’s behavior. This study investigates the potential impacts of psilocybin on β-cell viability, dedifferentiation, and function using an in vitro system. The INS-1 832/13 Rat Insulinoma cell line underwent psilocybin pretreatment, followed by exposure to high glucose-high lipid (HG-HL) conditions for specific time periods. After being harvested from treated cells, total transcript and cellular protein were utilized for further investigation. Our findings implied that psilocybin administration effectively mitigates HG-HL-stimulated β-cell loss, potentially mediated through the modulation of apoptotic biomarkers, which is possibly related to the mitigation of TXNIP, STAT-1, and STAT-3 phosphorylation. Furthermore, psilocybin exhibits the capacity to modulate the expression of key genes associated with β-cell dedifferentiation, including Pou5f1 and Nanog, indicating its potential in attenuating β-cell dedifferentiation. This research lays the groundwork for further exploration into the therapeutic potential of psilocybin in Type II diabetes intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenesSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207