ライフサイエンスコーパス: LGI

1 LGI family members, LGI3, LGI4 and a newly identified sp

2 mparisons: LGI compared with HGI, P = 1.000; LGI compared with LF, P = 0.016; HGI compared with LF, P

3 lated GIs of the meals were 78 (HGI) and 44 (LGI).

4 A LGI preexercise meal resulted in a higher rate of fat ox

5 icrobiota encroachment and protected against LGI and metabolic syndrome.

6 peak oxygen uptake, participants consumed an LGI (GI approximately 37) or HGI (GI approximately 92) m

7 ed the effects of a hypocaloric diet with an LGI and low glycemic load on anthropometric and metaboli

8 A low-intensity dietary intervention with an LGI diet compared with an HE diet in pregnancy did not r

9 r values on the VLC than LF (p = 0.0064) and LGI (p = 0.0066) diets.

10 ference), high-MUFA and HGI (HM/HGI), HM and LGI (HM/LGI), low-fat and HGI (LF/HGI), and LF and LGI (

11 M/LGI), low-fat and HGI (LF/HGI), and LF and LGI (LF/LGI) diets.

12 F = 4.616, P = 0.012; pairwise comparisons: LGI compared with HGI, P = 1.000; LGI compared with LF,

13 2) a moderate-carbohydrate and low-GI diet (LGI), and 3) a low-fat and high-GI diet (LF).

14 with non-GVHD diarrhea; REG3alpha discerned LGI GVHD from non-GVHD diarrhea better than HGF and cyto

15 sations more so than an otherwise equivalent LGI meal in type 1 diabetes patients.

16 nificantly from those in the other 2 groups (LGI: -2.45 +/- 0.27; HGI: -2.30 +/- 0.27; LF: -1.43 +/-

17 , high-MUFA and HGI (HM/HGI), HM and LGI (HM/LGI), low-fat and HGI (LF/HGI), and LF and LGI (LF/LGI)

18 M/HGI group, 2.1% (-5.8%, 10.7%); for the HM/LGI group, -3.5% (-10.6%, 4.3%); for the LF/HGI group, -

19 Patients were assigned to a hypocaloric LGI-diet group or a control group and followed the proto

20 The hypocaloric LGI diet promoted a decrease in BMI, percentage of body

21 redicted nonresponse to therapy at day 28 in LGI GVHD patients, only REG3alpha and HGF concentrations

22 3 biomarkers were significantly elevated in LGI GVHD compared with non-GVHD diarrhea; REG3alpha disc

23 the appetite response to low-glycemic index (LGI) and high-glycemic index (HGI) postexercise meals in

24 glycemic index (HGI) or low glycemic index (LGI) are uncertain.

25 Low-glycemic index (LGI) diets seem to exert a positive effect on weight los

26 A diet with a low glycemic index (LGI) has been shown to reduce birth percentiles and the

27 rates with high (HGI) or low glycemic index (LGI) on substrate utilization during rest and exercise i

28 , 20% fat, 20% protein), low-glycemic index (LGI, 40%-40%-20%), and very low-carbohydrate (VLC, 10%-6

29 Regional local gyrification index (LGI) values, as measured by FreeSurfer software, were co

30 obiota encroachment, low-grade inflammation (LGI), and metabolic syndrome.

31 They were then provided isocaloric LF, LGI, and VLC diets in a randomized crossover design, eac

32 low-fat and HGI (LF/HGI), and LF and LGI (LF/LGI) diets.

33 group, -8.6% (-15.4%, -1.1%); and for the LF/LGI group, 9.9% (2.4%, 18.0%).

34 3-alpha (REG3alpha) as a plasma biomarker of LGI GVHD.

35 ontrolled trial that compared the effects of LGI dietary advice with HE advice on pregnancy outcomes.

36 Although the function of LGI proteins remains unknown, structural analyses sugges

37 We investigated whether offering LGI dietary advice at the first antenatal visit would re

38 ate the csp-1 mutation to a narrow region on LGI.

39 he LC-CONV diet, the main effect of the LC-P-LGI diet was a greater decrease in adipocyte diameter (P

40 n comparison with the LC-CONV diet, the LC-P-LGI diet was associated with improvement in some cardiom

41 active protein decreased only after the LC-P-LGI diet, with no differences between diets, fasting pla

42 ds of a 4-wk hypocaloric diet as either LC-P-LGI or LC-CONV, separated by 8-wk washout intervals.

43 a low glycemic index and soluble fiber (LC-P-LGI) would be more effective than a low-calorie conventi

44 For patients, LGI values were examined grouped across psychotic diagno

45 l measures were also calculated for regional LGI values.

46 The LGI and SLIT genes have a distinctive leucine-rich repea

47 The LGI-diet group had 85.4% more oocytes retrieved than did

48 eater after the HGI breakfast than after the LGI breakfast (P < 0.05).

49 5% greater after the HGI meal than after the LGI meal (P < 0.001), whereas hunger sensations were app

50 y 9% lower after the HGI meal than after the LGI meal (P = 0.001).

51 cose area under the curve (AUC) than did the LGI meal (P = 0.008).

52 se in acylated ghrelin concentrations in the LGI group compared with the control group (P = 0.215).

53 Three patients (21.4%) in the LGI group experienced a spontaneous pregnancy during the

54 nction was also significantly greater in the LGI group than in the LF group (P < 0.05).

55 Reductions in BMI were greater in the LGI group than in the LF group, whereas in the HGI group

56 In the LGI group, the GI was reduced from a mean (+/- SEM) of 5

57 tions were higher throughout exercise in the LGI trial (P < 0.05).

58 ted rate of fat oxidation was greater in the LGI trial than in the HGI trial (P < 0.05).

59 body fat, waist:hip ratio, and leptin in the LGI-diet group than in the control group (P < 0.05).

60 Members of the LGI and SLIT family of genes have been implicated in spe

61 LGI1, one member of the LGI gene family, encodes a approximately 63 kDa protein,

62 cantly lower after the LF test meal than the LGI (p<0.0001) and VLC (p<0.0001) test meals.

63 The lower gastrointestinal tract (LGI) and liver are the GVHD target organs most associate

64 A hypocaloric diet combined with LGI foods seems to be beneficial for these patients, but

65 cholesterol concentrations were greater with LGI.