Arginine vasopressin and copeptin: comparative review and perspective in veterinary medicine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although arginine vasopressin (AVP) deficiency, AVP resistance, and primary polydipsia are important causes of polyuria and polydipsia (PUPD), measurement of AVP has never been implemented as a routine diagnostic test for patient care in either human or veterinary medicine, due to significant challenges with the methodologic reliability of laboratory assays for measuring AVP. Responses to a modified water deprivation test and/or a desmopressin acetate trial have been used as indirect markers of AVP deficiency or resistance. However, interpretations of these tests can be especially challenging in cases of partial AVP deficiency or resistance. Over the past decade, plasma copeptin (CoP), a glycopeptide comprising the C-terminal part of the AVP preprohormone, has mostly replaced AVP measurement in humans. When combined with CoP-based stimulation tests, such as hypertonic saline and arginine stimulation tests, plasma CoP measurement offers excellent diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis and differentiation of cases of central diabetes insipidus (DI), nephrogenic DI, and primary polydipsia in humans. In dogs, CoP has recently been measured in saliva and serum using canine or human enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. This review will provide an update on the physiologic regulation of AVP production and secretion, the limitations of its measurement in human and veterinary medicine, as well as a summary of the indications and performance of CoP measurement in human and veterinary medicine to date. This is with a purpose to encourage validation and implementation of CoP measurement in veterinary medicine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".