| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Original Studies |
Medical Department M (Endocrinology and Diabetes) (H.N., N.V., N.M., J.S.C., J.O.L.J.), Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8000 C, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Growth and Reproduction (A.J., N.E.S.), Copenhagen University Hospital, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark; and Department of Metabolic Medicine (K.G.M.M.A.), University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4HH United Kingdom
Address correspondence and requests for reprints to: Helene Nørrelund, Medical Department M, Aarhus Kommunehospital, DK-8000 C, Aarhus, Denmark. E-mail: hn{at}afdm.au.dk
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We, therefore, evaluated insulin sensitivity (euglycemic glucose clamp)
and substrate metabolism in 18 GH-deficient patients (6 females and 12
males; age, 20 ± 1 yr; body mass index, 25 ± 1
kg/m2) in a placebo-controlled, parallel study.
Measurements were made at baseline, where all patients were on their
regular GH replacement, after 12 months of either continued GH
(0.018 ± 0.001 mg/kg·day) or placebo, and finally after 12
months of open phase GH therapy (0.016 mg/kg·day). Before study entry
GH deficiency was reconfirmed by a stimulation test. During the
double-blind phase, insulin sensitivity and fat mass tended to increase
in the placebo group [
M-value (mg/kg·min), -0.7 ± 1.1 (GH)
vs. 1.3 ± 0.8 (placebo), P =
0.18;
TBF (kg), 0.9 ± 1.2 (GH) vs. 4.4 ±
1.6 (placebo), P = 0.1]. Rates of lipid oxidation
decreased [
lipid oxidation (mg/kg·min), 0.02 ± 0.14 (GH)
vs. -0.32 ± 0.13 (placebo), P
< 0.05], whereas glucose oxidation increased in the placebo-treated
group (P < 0.05). In the open phase, a decrease in
insulin sensitivity was found in the former placebo group, although
they lost body fat and increased fat-free mass [M-value (mg/kg·min),
5.1 ± 0.7 (placebo) vs. 3.4 ± 1.0 (open),
P = 0.09]. In the group randomized to continued GH
treatment almost all hormonal and metabolic parameters remained
unchanged during the study.
In conclusion, 1) discontinuation of GH therapy for 1 yr in adolescent patients induces fat accumulation without compromising insulin sensitivity; and 2) the beneficial effects of continued GH treatment on body composition in terms of decrease in fat mass and increase in fat-free mass does not fully balance the direct insulin antagonistic effects.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The appropriate management of GH-deficient patients during transition from childhood to adulthood has not been investigated in controlled trials, but there is evidence to suggest that this particular phase may be associated with specific problems in relation to GH sensitivity (12, 13, 14, 15). An issue of particular interest is the impact of GH substitution on insulin sensitivity, which usually declines during normal puberty (16, 17, 18).
To pursue this, we conducted a trial in a group of GH-treated young adults with childhood-onset disease. At the time where discontinuation of GH therapy traditionally would be considered, the patients were randomized to either continued GH or placebo for 1 yr, followed by a 2nd yr of open GH treatment. Substrate metabolism and insulin sensitivity were studied at baseline, after 12 months of either continued GH or placebo, and finally after 12 months of open phase GH therapy.
| Subjects and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Eighteen subjects (6 females and 12 males; age, 20 ± 1 yr;
body mass index, 25 ± 1 kg/m2) with
childhood-onset GH deficiency (GHD) reconfirmed by at least one
classical GH stimulation test were included in the study. All
participants were retested and had a subnormal GH response to infusion
of arginine [peak GH response (µg/L): 1.2 ± 0.5]. The
etiology of GHD was idiopathic in 12 patients. A detailed description
of each patient is given in Table 1
. All
18 subjects completed the double-blind phase. Two subjects withdrew
after 21 months; one because of regrowth of an intracranial tumor, and
one because of compliance problems. Both of these patients had received
GH since the start of the study. The study was approved by the regional
Ethical Committee and the National Board of Health and was conducted
according to the Declaration of Helsinki and the guidelines of Good
Clinical Practice.
|
During the first 12 months, the study had a randomized, parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. The subsequent 12 months was an open phase, during which all patients received GH. In the double-blind phase the patients continued their usual GH dose (0.018 ± 0.001 mg/kg·day; Norditropin, Novo Nordisk A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark). Nine subjects received GH, and nine received placebo. In the open phase, the dose was escalated starting with 0.004 mg/kg·day in the first 2 weeks, 0.008 mg/kg·day in weeks 36, and 0.016 mg/kg·day from week 7 onward. No adverse advents were recorded. There was no washout period before either treatment was started. The patients were admitted to the hospital for 2 days at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. In addition, all patients were seen at the outpatient clinic every 3 months for interviews and physical examination.
Body composition and euglycemic hyperinsulinemic glucose clamp
TBF and FFM were measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry using a Hologic QDR-2000 densitometer (Hologic, Inc., Waltham, MA).
After an overnight fast, a bolus of 20 µCi [3-3H]-glucose (New England, Nuclear, Boston, MA) was given, followed by a continous infusion of 0.2 µCi/min for 5 h. Two and one half hours were allowed for the isotope to equilibrate. Insulin sensitivity was estimated by means of a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp. From 10301300 h a constant amount (0.6 mU/kg·min) of insulin (Actrapid; Novo Nordisk) was infused; based on measurements every 5 min, plasma glucose was clamped at 5.0 mmol/L by infusion of variable rates of a 20% glucose solution. Plasma glucose was measured on a glucose analyzer (Beckman Coulter, Inc., Palo Alto, CA) immediately after sampling. Blood samples were drawn at baseline and in triplicate the last 30 min of both the 2.5-h basal period and the 2.5-h clamp period. During the clamp, hepatic glucose production was calculated by subtracting the amount of exogenous glucose necessary to maintain euglycemia (M-value) from the isotopically determined overall appearance rate for glucose. Indirect calorimetry was performed using a ventilated hood system (Deltatrac; Datex Instrumentarium, Helsinki, Finland) before the start and at end of insulin infusion to assess resting energy expenditure (EE) and respiratory exchange ratio (RQ). Net lipid and glucose oxidation rates [Rd(ox)] were calculated from the above measurements, and protein oxidation rates were estimated from the urinary excretion of urea (19). Net nonoxidative glucose disposal [Rd(non-ox)] was calculated by subtracting oxidative glucose disposal [Rd(ox)] from total glucose disposal (Rd) measured isotopically.
Hormone and substrate analyses
A double monoclonal immunofluometric assay (Wallac, Inc., Turku, Finland) was used to measure serum GH. Serum insulin-like growth factor (IGF) I was measured by a noncompetitive time-resolved immunofluometric assay after removal of IGF-binding proteins with acid ethanol. Insulin was measured by a conventional in-house RIA. Nonesterified fatty acids (NEFAs) were determined by a colorimetric method using a commercial kit (Wako Chemicals, Neuss, Germany). Whole blood glycerol, 3-hydroxybutyrate, alanine, and lactate were analyzed by autofluorimetric enzymatic methods (20). Glucose turnover was estimated according to the non-steady-state model of Steele et al. as modified by De Bodo et al. (21) based on data from the infused tritiated glucose tracer.
Statistical analyses
Data, given as mean ± SEM, are based on
triplicate measurements within the last 30 min of the basal and clamp
period. Baseline data in the two treatment groups were compared with
Students t test for unpaired data. In each group, the
effect of continuation or discontinuation was evaluated by a paired
t test. Analysis of treatment effect was performed by
comparing
values in the GH vs. placebo group by
Students t test for unpaired data. Resting metabolic rate
data were normalized for differences in FFM and TBF by analysis of
covariance, which allows for the removal of the linear effect of the
covariate without making the assumption of a zero intercept. Analyses
were made on log-transformed data when not normally distributed, as
tested by Kolmogorov-Smirnov. A P value below 0.05 was
considered significant. All statistical computations were performed
with SPSS for Windows version 8.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago,
IL).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
At baseline levels of GH and IGF-I were similar [GH
(µg/L), 1.6 ± 0.3 (GH) vs. 1.1 ± 0.1
(placebo), P > 0.05; IGF-I (µg/L), 340 ± 57
(GH) vs. 422 ± 57 (placebo), P >
0.05] (Fig. 1
). The placebo group had
more body fat [TBF (kg), 16 ± 2 (GH) vs. 23 ± 2
(placebo), P < 0.05] (Table 2
), and increased plasma concentration of
insulin [insulin (pmol/L), 34 ± 4 (GH) vs. 75 ±
10 (placebo), P < 0.01] and glucose [glucose
(mmol/L), 4.8 ± 0.1 (GH) vs. 5.1 ± 0.1
(placebo), P < 0.01] (Fig. 1
). During the clamp,
comparable glucose infusion rates (M-value) were found [M-value (mg/kg
body weight·min), 4.8 ± 1.0 (GH) vs. 3.8 ± 0.6
(placebo), P > 0.05] (Table 2
), and no differences in
EE, urea excretion, RQ, substrate oxidation, or hepatic glucose
production were recorded.
|
|
During the double-blind phase, insulin sensitivity increased
among placebo-treated patients (P < 0.05) (Fig. 2
). The comparison of change in M-value
between GH-treated and placebo-treated patients failed to reach
significance [
M-value (mg/kg·min), -0.7 ± 1.1 (GH)
vs. 1.3 ± 0.8 (placebo), P = 0.18]
(Table 2
). TBF tended to increase in the placebo group [
TBF (kg),
0.9 ± 1.2 (GH) vs. 4.4 ± 1.6 (placebo),
P = 0.1] (Fig. 2
), whereas rates of lipid oxidation
decreased (P < 0.05) (Fig. 3
). Circulating levels of insulin
decreased in the placebo group [
insulin (pmol/L), 13 ± 11
(GH) vs. -32 ± 7 (placebo), P <
0.01] (Fig. 1
). The plasma level of alanine increased among
placebo-treated patients [
alanine (µmol/L), -28 ± 10 (GH)
vs. 57 ± 11 (placebo), P < 0.01],
whereas changes were comparable with regard to lactate, glycerol, NEFA,
and hydroxybutyrate (Table 2
).
|
|
EE (kcal/24
h), 18 ± 72 (GH) vs. -134 ± 73 (placebo),
P = 0.1], whereas the RQ increased [
RQ,
-0.01 ± 0.02 (GH) vs. 0.05 ± 0.02 (placebo),
P < 0.05] (Table 2
glucose oxidation (mg/kg·min), -0.2 ±
0.2 (GH) vs. 0.3 ± 0.2 (placebo), P <
0.05] (Fig. 3
HGP (mg/kg·min), -0.03
± 0.19 (GH) vs. -0.21 ± 0.13 (placebo),
P = 0.5]. 24 months
In the open phase, the M-value tended to decrease [M-value
(mg/kg·min), 5.1 ± 0.7 (12 months) vs. 3.4 ±
1.0 (24 months), P = 0.09] in the former placebo group
(Fig. 2
). A significant decrease in TBF was found [TBF (kg), 27
± 3 (12 months) vs. 20 ± 3 (24 months),
P < 0.05] (Fig. 2
), together with an increase in FFM
[FFM (kg), 51 ± 5 (12 months) vs. 58 ± 6 (24
months), P < 0.05] (Table 2
). No changes in body
composition were recorded in the group randomized to continued GH
treatment. Circulating levels of insulin increased [insulin (pmol/L),
44 ± 5 (12 months) vs. 110 ± 30 (24 months),
P < 0.05] in the previous placebo group (Fig. 1
),
together with increased concentrations of glycerol, NEFA, and
3-hydroxybutyrate (P < 0.01), whereas an increase in
alanine level was found among GH-treated patients (P <
0.01) (Table 2
).
The RQ decreased in the former placebo group [RQ, 0.87 ± 0.01
(12 months) vs. 0.84 ± 0.01 (24 months),
P < 0.05 ], and lipid oxidation increased [lipid
oxidation (kcal/24 h), 491 ± 98 (12 months) vs.
695 ± 82 (24 months), P = 0.1] (Fig. 3
). Glucose
oxidation tended to decrease (P = 0.14), whereas total
glucose turnover remained unchanged.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The study clearly suggests that in this particular patient group the direct insulin antagonistic actions of GH dominate over the effects on body composition with regard to the net effect on insulin sensitivity. By coincidence, our placebo group was more obese and hyperinsulinemic at baseline.
Insulin sensitivity becomes diminished during normal puberty (16, 18). Fasting plasma insulin and C-peptide concentrations were higher in adolescents than in preadolescents and adults, and despite identical glucose increments during a hyperglycemic clamp, both first- and second-phase plasma insulin and C-peptide responses were markedly greater (16). A positive correlation between GH response to arginine and ß-cell response to glucose has also been demonstrated, suggesting that insulin resistance during normal puberty may be causally linked to the concomitant increase in GH secretion (17). Our study confirms and extends this notion.
As shown previously, similarities between the so-called metabolic syndrome and untreated GHD in adults include premature atherosclerosis, visceral obesity, dyslipidemia, increased prevalence of hypertension, and insulin resistance (22, 23, 24, 25). The change in atherogenic risk factors has also been studied in GH-deficient children treated with GH for 1 yr (26). A decrease in body fat, as well as an increase in FFM, was demonstrated. This improvement in body composition during GH treatment suggests beneficial effects of GH on body composition, which may reduce the risk of developing premature atherosclerosis. The beneficial effect of GH on body composition has also been demonstrated by discontinuation of GH therapy in young GH-deficient adults, which resulted in a significant decrease in both muscle bulk and strength after 612 months (27).
In the present study, a decrease in lipid oxidation and increase in glucose oxidation was observed with GH discontinuation. This is in line with earlier observations (28, 29), as GH seems to exert little effect on total glucose turnover and utilization, whereas lipid mobilization partitions glucose flux into nonoxidative pathways.
GH treatment causes insulin antagonism. In patients with intact ß-cell function these changes are counterbalanced by hyperinsulinemia, which, by some, is considered a cardiovascular risk factor (23). Continuous GH infusions induce acute insulin resistance characterized by impaired suppression of hepatic glucose production and decreased insulin-dependent glucose disposal (5, 30, 31, 32). An inhibition of insulin-mediated activation of the glycogen synthase in skeletal muscle biopsies by a mechanism distal to insulin receptor binding and kinase activity has been demonstrated (32, 33), whereas insulin receptor concentration and affinity seem unchanged (5, 30, 35). The increased lipid oxidation could also be of importance for the insulin-resistance seen, since it may lead to a decreased glucose use due to the "glucose-NEFA cycle" (36).
Several lines of evidence support the notion that GH stimulates EE (3, 37, 38, 39). In the present study, EE decreased with GH discontinuation. It has been suggested that the calorigenic actions of GH are, in part, secondary to the increments in FFM. In the present study, no decrease in FFM was observed in the placebo-treated group. Furthermore, stimulation of EE has been recorded after only 5 h of iv GH infusion in normal subjects (33), implying that GH may stimulate EE independent of body composition.
In conclusion, our data indicate that during adolescence the beneficial effects on body composition of continued GH substitution in GH-deficient patients do not overcome the direct insulin antagonistic effects of GH. Whether the GH-induced relative insulin resistance observed in these patients is unfavorable is uncertain, inasmuch as normal puberty is associated with reduced insulin sensitivity. Still, the possibility of reducing the GH dose after completion of puberty merits consideration. At any rate, this study implies that the medical care of transition phase patients in terms of GH substitution remains a difficult challenge and should involve multidisciplinary collaboration.
Received September 15, 1999.
Revised January 14, 2000.
Accepted February 2, 2000.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. Lindberg-Larsen, N. Moller, O. Schmitz, S. Nielsen, M. Andersen, H. Orskov, and J. O. L. Jorgensen The Impact of Pegvisomant Treatment on Substrate Metabolism and Insulin Sensitivity in Patients with Acromegaly J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., May 1, 2007; 92(5): 1724 - 1728. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A Ciresi, M C Amato, A Criscimanna, A Mattina, C Vetro, A Galluzzo, G D'Acquisto, and C Giordano Metabolic parameters and adipokine profile during GH replacement therapy in children with GH deficiency Eur. J. Endocrinol., March 1, 2007; 156(3): 353 - 360. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Mauras, O. H. Pescovitz, V. Allada, M. Messig, M. P. Wajnrajch, B. Lippe, and on behalf of the Transition Study Group Limited Efficacy of Growth Hormone (GH) during Transition of GH-Deficient Patients from Adolescence to Adulthood: A Phase III Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized Two-Year Trial J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., July 1, 2005; 90(7): 3946 - 3955. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Mukherjee, S. Tolhurst-Cleaver, W. D. J. Ryder, L. Smethurst, and S. M. Shalet The Characteristics of Quality of Life Impairment in Adult Growth Hormone (GH)-Deficient Survivors of Cancer and Their Response to GH Replacement Therapy J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2005; 90(3): 1542 - 1549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. V. Carroll, W. M. Drake, K. T. Maher, K. Metcalfe, N. J. Shaw, D. B. Dunger, T. D. Cheetham, C. Camacho-Hubner, M. O. Savage, and J. P. Monson Comparison of Continuation or Cessation of Growth Hormone (GH) Therapy on Body Composition and Metabolic Status in Adolescents with Severe GH Deficiency at Completion of Linear Growth J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., August 1, 2004; 89(8): 3890 - 3895. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. K. Gleeson, H. R. Gattamaneni, L. Smethurst, B. M. Brennan, and S. M. Shalet Reassessment of Growth Hormone Status Is Required at Final Height in Children Treated with Growth Hormone Replacement after Radiation Therapy J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., February 1, 2004; 89(2): 662 - 666. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. M. Drake, S. J. Howell, J. P. Monson, and S. M. Shalet Optimizing GH Therapy in Adults and Children Endocr. Rev., August 1, 2001; 22(4): 425 - 450. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Endocrinology | Endocrine Reviews | J. Clin. End. & Metab. |
| Molecular Endocrinology | Recent Prog. Horm. Res. | All Endocrine Journals |