No abstract

The incretin hormones glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) are secreted postprandially and contribute importantly to postprandial glucose tolerance. In this study, we assessed the individual and combined contributions of endogenous GIP and GLP-1 to the postprandial changes in glucose and glucoregulatory hormones using the novel GIP receptor antagonist GIP(3-30)NH2 and the well-established GLP-1 receptor antagonist exendin(9-39)NH2. During 4-h oral glucose tolerance tests (75 g) combined with an ad libitum meal test, 18 healthy men received on four separate days in randomized, double-blinded order intravenous infusions of A) GIP(3-30)NH2 (800 pmol/kg/min) plus exendin(9-39)NH2 (0–20 min: 1,000 pmol/kg/min; 20–240 min: 450 pmol/kg/min), B) GIP(3-30)NH2, C) exendin(9-39)NH2, and D) saline, respectively. Glucose excursions were significantly higher during A than during B, C, and D, while glucose excursions during B were higher than during C and D. Insulin secretion (assessed by C-peptide/glucose ratio) was reduced by 37 ± 16% (A), 30 ± 17% (B), and 8.6 ± 16% (C) compared with D (mean ± SD). A and C resulted in higher glucagon levels and faster gastric emptying. In conclusion, endogenous GIP affects postprandial plasma glucose excursions and insulin secretion more than endogenous GLP-1, but the hormones contribute additively to postprandial glucose regulation in healthy individuals.

Background and PurposeGlucose‐dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) affects lipid, bone and glucose homeostasis. High‐affinity ligands for the GIP receptor are needed to elucidate the physiological functions and pharmacological potential of GIP in vivo. GIP(1–30)NH2 is a naturally occurring truncation of GIP(1–42). Here, we have characterized eight N‐terminal truncations of human GIP(1–30)NH2.Experimental ApproachCOS‐7 cells were transiently transfected with human GIP receptors and assessed for cAMP accumulation upon ligand stimulation or competition binding with 125I‐labelled GIP(1–42), GIP(1–30)NH2, GIP(2–30)NH2 or GIP(3–30)NH2.Key ResultsGIP(1–30)NH2 displaced 125I‐GIP(1–42) as effectively as GIP(1–42) (Ki 0.75 nM), whereas the eight truncations displayed lower affinities (Ki 2.3–347 nM) with highest affinities for GIP(3–30)NH2 and GIP(5–30)NH2 (5–30)NH2. Only GIP(1–30)NH2 (Emax 100% of GIP(1–42)) and GIP(2–30)NH2 (Emax 20%) were agonists. GIP(2‐ to 9–30)NH2 displayed antagonism (IC50 12–450 nM) and Schild plot analyses identified GIP(3–30)NH2 and GIP(5–30)NH2 as competitive antagonists (Ki 15 nM). GIP(3–30) NH2 was a 26‐fold more potent antagonist than GIP(3–42). Binding studies with agonist (125I‐GIP(1–30)NH2), partial agonist (125I‐GIP(2–30)NH2) and competitive antagonist (125I‐GIP(3–30)NH2) revealed distinct receptor conformations for these three ligand classes.Conclusions and ImplicationsThe N‐terminus is crucial for GIP agonist activity. Removal of the C‐terminus of the endogenous GIP(3–42) creates another naturally occurring, more potent, antagonist GIP(3–30)NH2, which like GIP(5–30)NH2, was a high‐affinity competitive antagonist. These peptides may be suitable tools for basic GIP research and future pharmacological interventions.

Background and PurposeSpecific, high potency receptor antagonists are valuable tools when evaluating animal and human physiology. Within the glucose‐dependent, insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) system, considerable attention has been given to the presumed GIP receptor antagonist, (Pro3)GIP, and its effect in murine studies. We conducted a pharmacological analysis of this ligand including interspecies differences between the rodent and human GIP system.Experimental ApproachTransiently transfected COS‐7 cells were assessed for cAMP accumulation upon ligand stimulation and assayed in competition binding using 125I‐human GIP. Using isolated perfused pancreata both from wild type and GIP receptor‐deficient rodents, insulin‐releasing, glucagon‐releasing and somatostatin‐releasing properties in response to species‐specific GIP and (Pro3)GIP analogues were evaluated.Key ResultsHuman (Pro3)GIP is a full agonist at human GIP receptors with similar efficacy (E max) for cAMP production as human GIP, while both rat and mouse(Pro3)GIP were partial agonists on their corresponding receptors. Rodent GIPs are more potent and efficacious at their receptors than human GIP. In perfused pancreata in the presence of 7 mM glucose, both rodent (Pro3)GIP analogues induced modest insulin, glucagon and somatostatin secretion, corresponding to the partial agonist activities observed in cAMP production.Conclusions and ImplicationsWhen evaluating new compounds, it is important to consider interspecies differences both at the receptor and ligand level. Thus, in rodent models, human GIP is a comparatively weak partial agonist. Human (Pro3)GIP was not an antagonist at human GIP receptors, so there is still a need for a potent antagonist in order to elucidate the physiology of human GIP.

No abstract

A truncated form of human glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), GIP(3-30)NH, was recently identified as an antagonist of the human GIP receptor. This study examined the ability of GIP(3-30)NH to antagonize the physiological actions of GIP in glucose metabolism, subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue blood flow (ATBF), and lipid metabolism in humans. Eight lean subjects were studied by measuring arteriovenous concentrations of metabolites and ATBF on three different occasions during hyperglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamps with concomitant infusions of GIP, GIP(3-30)NH, or both GIP and GIP(3-30)NH During infusion of GIP(3-30)NH alone and in combination with GIP, insulin levels and the total glucose amount infused to maintain the clamp were lower than during GIP alone. In addition, ATBF remained constant during the antagonist and increased only slightly in combination with GIP, whereas it increased fivefold during GIP alone. Adipose tissue triacylglyceride (TAG) and glucose uptake decreased, and the free fatty acid/glycerol ratio increased during the antagonist alone and in combination with GIP. The changes in glucose infusion rates and plasma insulin levels demonstrate an inhibitory effect of the antagonist on the incretin effect of GIP. In addition, the antagonist inhibited GIP-induced increase in ATBF and decreased the adipose tissue TAG uptake, indicating that GIP also plays a crucial role in lipid metabolism.

The human cytomegalovirus (CMV) proteins US28 and UL33 are homologous to chemokine receptors (CKRs). Knockout of the mouse CMV M33 protein (UL33 homologue) results in substantial attenuation of salivary gland infection/replication and reduced efficiency of reactivation from tissue explants. M33-mediated G protein-coupled signaling is critical for the salivary gland phenotype. In this report, we demonstrate that US28 and (to a lesser degree) UL33 restore reactivation from tissue explants and partially restore replication in salivary glands (compared to a signaling-deficient M33 mutant). These studies provide a novel small animal model for evaluation of therapies targeting the human CMV CKRs.Chemokine receptor (CKR) homologues and other seventransmembrane receptor (7TMR) homologues are characteristic of beta-and gammaherpesviruses and are potential therapeutic targets (7,14,16). Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) encodes four 7TMRs: UL33 and UL78 are conserved in all betaherpesviruses, whereas US28/US27 homologues are restricted to primate betaherpesviruses.Clues to the roles of HCMV 7TMRs have come from in vivo studies of mouse and rat CMVs (MCMV and RCMV, respectively). Acute-phase replication in primary organs is followed by dissemination to secondary sites, such as salivary glands, where virus may replicate for several days, attaining high titers. Following immune clearance of productive infection, latently infected cells remain distributed in a number of organs. In the absence of M33 (UL33 homologue), MCMV failed to attain detectable levels of infectious virus in salivary glands, with similar observations for R33 of RCMV (1, 5), suggesting evolutionarily conserved functions. The mechanisms underlying salivary gland attenuation may include defects in dissemination to, initial infection of, or maintenance of productive infection within that organ. Definitive studies are lacking, but there is some evidence for attenuation at a postdissemination step; the M33-null mutant was defective for replication following direct intrasalivary gland inoculation, and the R33-null mutant was detectable in salivary glands (by PCR), similar to the wild type at early times postinfection (1, 5). We and others have demonstrated the importance of constitutive M33-induced signaling for the salivary gland phenotype (4, 15). We further demonstrated that an M33-null mutant was deficient for reactivation in an ex vivo tissue explant model (2), although whether M33 plays a specific role during the establishment of, maintenance of, or reactivation from latency is not yet known.

The study was funded by Gangstedfonden, the European Foundation for the Study of Diabetes, and Aase og Ejnar Danielsens fond.