4.5 Article

Imbalance Between Postprandial Ghrelin and Insulin Responses to an Ad Libitum Meal in Obese Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

期刊

REPRODUCTIVE SCIENCES
卷 21, 期 8, 页码 1020-1026

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1933719114522521

关键词

ghrelin; insulin resistance; obesity; polycystic ovary syndrome; appetite regulation

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  2. Fundacao de Apoio ao Ensino, Pesquisa e Assistencia (FAEPA) of the University Hospital, Ribeirao Preto Medical School, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Obese women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) may have impairment in the regulation of food intake associated with ghrelin and insulin. In order to compare postprandial ghrelin and insulin responses to an ad libitum meal, we assessed 30 obese women with PCOS and 23 obese women without PCOS (control group). Blood samples were taken under fasting conditions, preprandially, and 15, 45, 75, and 135 minutes after the beginning of an ad libitum meal and ghrelin and insulin concentrations were analyzed. Insulin resistance (IR) was classified using basal insulin, quantitative insulin sensitivity check index, and homeostasis model assessment index. Mean ad libitum food intake was similar between the groups (468 +/- 150 vs 444 +/- 165 g, P = .60). The IR was found in 56.6% in PCOS group compared with 30.4% in the control group (P < .01). The postprandial ghrelin response was similar in both the groups but the insulin area under the curve (AUC) tend to be greater in the PCOS group (12807 +/- 8149.4 vs 8654.4 +/- 7232.3 mu IU/mL/min; P = .057). The ghrelin AUC was negatively correlated with the insulin AUC (r = -.5138; P = .01) only in the control group. The imbalance in the feedback mechanisms between insulin and ghrelin, present in obese women, especially those with IR, may affect food intake throughout the day and that could be a mechanism for the development of obesity in PCOS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据