4.6 Article

Incretin and islet hormonal responses to fat and protein ingestion in healthy men

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpendo.90233.2008

关键词

insulin; glucagon; glucagon-like peptide-1; glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide; incretins; man

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk
  2. Swedish Research Council [6834]
  3. Region Skane
  4. Faculty of Medicine, Lund University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) regulate islet function after carbohydrate ingestion. Whether incretin hormones are of importance for islet function after ingestion of noncarbohydrate macronutrients is not known. This study therefore examined integrated incretin and islet hormone responses to ingestion of pure fat (oleic acid; 0.88 g/kg) or protein (milk and egg protein; 2 g/kg) over 5 h in healthy men, aged 20-25 yr (n = 12); plain water ingestion served as control. Both intact (active) and total GLP-1 and GIP levels were determined as was plasma activity of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4). Following water ingestion, glucose, insulin, glucagon, GLP-1, and GIP levels and DPP-4 activity were stable during the 5-h study period. Both fat and protein ingestion increased insulin, glucagon, GIP, and GLP-1 levels without affecting glucose levels or DPP-4 activity. The GLP-1 responses were similar after protein and fat, whereas the early (30 min) GIP response was higher after protein than after fat ingestion (P < 0.001). This was associated with sevenfold higher insulin and glucagon responses compared with fat ingestion (both P < 0.001). After protein, the early GIP, but not GLP-1, responses correlated to insulin (r(2) = 0.86; P = 0.0001) but not glucagon responses. In contrast, after fat ingestion, GLP-1 and GIP did not correlate to islet hormones. We conclude that, whereas protein and fat release both incretin and islet hormones, the early GIP secretion after protein ingestion may be of primary importance to islet hormone secretion.

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

4.6
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