Incretin-mediated control of cardiac energy metabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like-peptide-1 (GLP-1) are incretin hormones that stimulate insulin secretion and improve glycemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Data from several cardiovascular outcome trials for GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists have demonstrated significant reductions in the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events in individuals with T2D. Although the cardiovascular actions attributed to GLP-1R agonism have been extensively studied, little is known regarding the cardiovascular consequences attributed to GIP receptor (GIPR) agonism. As there is now an increasing focus on the development of incretin-based co-agonist therapies that activate both the GLP-1R and GIPR, it is imperative that we understand the mechanism(s) through which these incretins impact cardiovascular function. This is especially important considering that cardiovascular disease represents the leading cause of death in individuals with T2D. With increasing evidence that perturbations in cardiac energy metabolism are a major contributor to the pathology of diabetes-related cardiovascular disease, this may represent a key component through which GLP-1R and GIPR agonism influence cardiovascular outcomes. Not only do GIP and GLP-1 increase the secretion of insulin, they may also modify glucagon secretion, both of which have potent actions on cardiac substrate utilization. Herein we will discuss the potential direct and indirect actions through which GLP-1R and GIPR agonism impact cardiac energy metabolism while interrogating the evidence to support whether such actions may account for incretin-mediated cardioprotection in T2D.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".