Characterizing the Impact of Dietary Mineral Intake on Secondary Hyperparathyroidism, Vascular Calcification, and Bone Disease Within Experimental Chronic Kidney Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects an estimated 25 million North Americans and is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and overall mortality. This is largely a result of systemic dysregulation in mineral metabolism, termed CKD-mineral bone disorder (CKD-MBD). The aim of this study was to investigate how elevated dietary phosphate (PO4), and further, the resulting decreases in the ratio of calcium (Ca)-to- PO4, contribute to key cardiovascular disease risk factors: mineral bone disorder pathology and secondary hyperparathyroidism. Male rats had CKD induced using dietary adenine, and then were either sacrificed after induction, or challenged with a 12-day dietary intervention. 4 diets were used, assessing a combination of high vs low dietary PO4, and Ca-to-PO4 ratio. All 5 CKD groups, in addition to healthy control animals, were compared with respect to serum mineral and hormone levels, bone microarchitecture, VC, and ex vivo parathyroid gland responsiveness. For each parameter tested, all 5 CKD groups were shown to be significantly different from controls, with 12 days of dietary intervention producing further changes. Despite similar levels of VC between dietary intervention groups, mineral content of the dietary intervention was shown to have an impact on serum parameters, with low dietary Ca:PO4 ratio, as well as high dietary PO4, regardless of ratio, producing significant elevations in parathyroid hormone and circulating P relative to animals fed normal PO4 with normal ratio. Normal PO4 with normal ratio was also shown to be protective against bone loss, with low ratio and high PO4 groups showing greater loss. Overall, the findings show that compared to the other diets tested, normal dietary PO4 with normal Ca:PO4 ratio is associated with improved outcomes within CKD. Increasing dietary PO4, regardless of ratio, as well as lowering the ratio through reductions in Ca, exacerbates the abnormalities in mineral metabolism which develop within CKD and are associated with overall poor clinical outcomes, CVD, and high risk of mortality.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".