↓ Skip to main content

GIP increases adipose tissue expression and blood levels of MCP-1 in humans and links high energy diets to inflammation: a randomised trial

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetologia, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
GIP increases adipose tissue expression and blood levels of MCP-1 in humans and links high energy diets to inflammation: a randomised trial
Published in
Diabetologia, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00125-015-3618-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Özlem Gögebakan, Martin A. Osterhoff, Rita Schüler, Olga Pivovarova, Michael Kruse, Anne-Cathrin Seltmann, Alexander S. Mosig, Natalia Rudovich, Michael Nauck, Andreas F. H. Pfeiffer

Abstract

Obesity is associated with elevated monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), a proinflammatory chemokine related to diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Since obesity is triggered by energy dense diets, we hypothesised that nutrient induced intestinal hormones such as glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) may directly stimulate the release of chemokines from adipose tissue and induce low-grade inflammation. GIP effects on gene expression and secretion of inflammatory markers were studied by microarray analysis and PCR from human subcutaneous fat biopsies of slightly obese but healthy volunteers in the metabolic ward of German Institute of Human Nutrition, Department of Clinical Nutrition, Potsdam-Rehbrücke. To allocate the participants to the study arms they were numbered in order of their recruitment and then assigned to the groups by a random number generator. In a randomised, single-blind (participants) crossover design, the participants received GIP infusions in postprandial concentrations (2 pmol kg(-1) min(-1)) or saline (154 mmol/l NaCl) infusions for 240 min either alone, in combination with hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic (EU) or hyperinsulinaemic-hyperglycaemic (HC) clamps. Possible mechanisms of GIP effects were investigated in single and co-cultures of macrophage and adipocyte cell lines and in primary human monocytes, macrophages and adipocytes. A total of 17 participants were randomised to the following groups: EU with GIP infusion (n = 9); EU with NaCl infusion (n = 9); HC with GIP infusion (n = 8); HC with NaCl infusion (n = 8); sole GIP infusion (n = 11) and sole placebo infusion (n = 11). All 17 individuals were analysed. The study is completed. In human subcutaneous adipose tissue (hSCAT), infusions of GIP significantly increased inflammatory chemokine and cytokine gene networks in transcriptomic microarray analyses. Particularly MCP-1 (180 ± 26%), MCP-2 (246 ± 58%) and IL-6 (234 ± 40%) mRNA levels in adipose tissue as well as circulating plasma concentrations of MCP-1 (165 ± 12 vs 135 ± 13 pg/ml; GIP vs saline after 240 min; p < 0.05 for all variables) in humans increased independently of circulating insulin or glucose plasma concentrations. GIP stimulation increased Mcp-1 mRNA-expression in co-cultures of differentiated 3T3L1-adipocytes and RAW 264.7 macrophages but not in the isolated cell lines. Similarly, GIP increased MCP-1 transcripts in co-cultures of primary human macrophages with human adipocytes. GIP receptor (GIPR) transcripts were present in primary monocytes and the different cell lines and induced activation of extracellular related kinase (ERK) as well as increases in cAMP, indicating functional receptors. Our findings suggest that the nutrient induced gut hormone GIP may initiate adipose tissue inflammation by triggering a crosstalk of adipocytes and macrophages involving MCP-1. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00774488 Funding: This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG): grant No. Pf164/021002.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Unknown 82 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Master 15 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Other 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 12 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Sports and Recreations 4 5%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 22 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2019.
All research outputs
#7,139,320
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#2,774
of 5,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,573
of 267,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#39
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,122 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.