Study record
Mitochondrial-Derived Peptides Are Down Regulated in Diabetes Subjects
Ramanjaneya M, Bettahi I, Jerobin J et al. · Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) · 2019
Human obs.Endogenous MOTS-c measuredEvidence tier B
What this study reported
Found lower serum MOTS-c in adults with type 2 diabetes than in controls. MOTS-c correlated positively with BMI, total cholesterol and LDL and negatively with age, HbA1c and glucose; in multilinear regression only humanin, not MOTS-c, correlated with HbA1c.
Limitations
Cross-sectional design; the abstract text is partly garbled, so some statistics could not be verified.
Study record
| Study model | Human observational |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | Endogenous MOTS-c measuredNaturally occurring MOTS-c was measured; nothing was given. |
| Species | human |
| System studied | Adults with normal glucose tolerance, prediabetes or type 2 diabetes; serum humanin, MOTS-c and adiponectin |
| Population | adults with normal glycaemia, prediabetes, or type 2 diabetes with good or poor glycaemic control |
| Design | Cross-sectional study |
| Sample size as reported | 225 subjects (68 normal, 33 prediabetes, 31 T2D with HbA1c below 7%, 93 T2D with HbA1c above 7%) |
| Control group | normoglycaemic subjects |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | serum MOTS-c; serum humanin; serum adiponectin; HbA1c and glucose; lipid profile |
| Pathways measured | Insulin & glucose handling |
| Research areas | Metabolic |
| Evidence tier | B — Other human study |
| Publication types | Journal Article |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- Human
- Sample size
- Adequate
- Controls
- Appropriate
- Outcome validity
- Validated biomarker
- Support for its own conclusion
- Moderate
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.