Myokine Secretion following an Aerobic Exercise Intervention in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes with or without Exercise Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is characterized by muscle metabolic dysfunction that exercise can minimize, but some patients do not respond to an exercise intervention. Myokine secretion is intrinsically altered in patients with T2D, but the role of myokines in exercise resistance in this patient population has never been studied. We sought to determine if changes in myokine secretion were linked to the response to an exercise intervention in patients with T2D. The participants followed a 10-week aerobic exercise training intervention, and patients with T2D were grouped based on muscle mitochondrial function improvement (responders versus non-responders). We measured myokines in serum and cell-culture medium of myotubes derived from participants pre- and post-intervention and in response to an in vitro model of muscle contraction. We also quantified the expression of genes related to inflammation in the myotubes pre- and post-intervention. No significant differences were detected depending on T2D status or response to exercise in the biological markers measured, with the exception of modest differences in expression patterns for certain myokines (IL-1β, IL-8, IL-10, and IL-15). Further investigation into the molecular mechanisms involving myokines may explain exercise resistance with T2D; however, the role in metabolic adaptations to exercise in T2D requires further investigation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".