4.7 Article

Inhibition of the intestinal glucose transporter GLUT2 by flavonoids

Journal

FASEB JOURNAL
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 366-377

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1096/fj.06-6620com

Keywords

intestinal sugar transporter; polyphenols; intraluminal flavonoids; Xenopus laevis

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [2005-005-J13001] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We tested whether the dominant intestinal sugar transporter GLUT2 was inhibited by intestinal luminal compounds that are inefficiently absorbed and naturally present in foods. Because of their abundance in fruits and vegetables, flavonoids were selected as model compounds. Robust inhibition of glucose and fructose transport by GLUT2 expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes was produced by the flavonols myricetin, fisetin, the widely consumed flavonoid quercetin, and its glucoside precursor isoquercetrin. IC(50)s for quercetin, myricetin, and isoquercetirin were similar to 200- to 1000-fold less than glucose or fructose concentrations, and noncompetitive inhibition was observed. The two other major intestinal sugar transporters, GLUT5 and SGLT1, were unaffected by flavonoids. Sugar transport by GLUT2 overexpressed in pituitary cells and naturally present in Caco-2E intestinal cells was similarly inhibited by quercetin. GLUT2 was detected on the apical side of Caco-2E cells, indicating that GLUT2 was in the correct orientation to be inhibited by luminal compounds. Quercetin itself was not transported by the three major intestinal glucose transporters. Because the flavonoid quercetin, a food component with an excellent pharmacology safety profile, might act as a potent luminal inhibitor of sugar absorption independent of its own transport, flavonols show promise as new pharmacologic agents in the obesity epidemic.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available