Bitter-tasting drugs tune GDF15 and GLP-1 expression via bitter taste or motilin receptors in the intestine of patients with obesity.

OBJECTIVE: Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15), a stress related cytokine, was recently identified as a novel satiety signal acting via the GFRAL receptor located in the hindbrain. Bitter compounds are known to induce satiety via the release of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) through activation of bitter taste receptors (TAS2Rs, 25 subtypes) on enteroendocrine cells in the gut. This study aimed to investigate whether and how bitter compounds induce a stress response in intestinal epithelial cells to affect GDF15 expression in patients with obesity, thereby facilitating satiety signaling from the gut. METHODS: The acute effect of oral intake of the bitter-containing medication Plaquenil (hydroxychloroquine sulfate) on plasma GDF15 levels was evaluated in a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, two-visit crossover study in healthy volunteers. Primary crypts isolated from the jejunal mucosa from patients with obesity were stimulated with vehicle or bitter compounds, and the effect on GDF15 expression was evaluated using RT-qPCR or ELISA. Immunofluorescence colocalization studies were performed between GDF15, epithelial cell type markers and TAS2Rs. The role of TAS2Rs was tested by 1) pretreatment with a TAS2R antagonist, GIV3727; 2) determining TAS2R4/43 polymorphisms that affect taste sensitivity to TAS2R4/43 agonists. RESULTS: Acute intake of hydroxychloroquine sulfate increased GDF15 plasma levels, which correlated with reduced hunger scores and plasma ghrelin levels in healthy volunteers. This effect was mimicked in primary jejunal cultures from patients with obesity. GDF15 was expressed in enteroendocrine and goblet cells with higher expression levels in patients with obesity. Various bitter-tasting compounds (medicinal, plant extracts, bacterial) either increased or decreased GDF15 expression, with some also affecting GLP-1. The effect was mediated by specific intestinal TAS2R subtypes and the unfolded protein response pathway. The bitter-induced effect on GDF15/GLP-1 expression was influenced by the existence of TAS2R4 amino acid polymorphisms and TAS2R43 deletion polymorphisms that may predict patient's therapeutic responsiveness. However, the effect of the bitter-tasting antibiotic azithromycin on GDF15 release was mediated via the motilin receptor, possibly explaining some of its aversive side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Bitter chemosensory and pharmacological receptors regulate the release of GDF15 from human gut epithelial cells and represent potential targets for modulating metabolic disorders or cachexia.

Human intestinal bitter taste receptors regulate innate immune responses and metabolic regulators in obesity.

Bitter taste receptors (taste 2 receptors, TAS2Rs) serve as warning sensors in the lingual system against the ingestion of potentially poisonous food. Here, we investigated the functional role of TAS2Rs in the human gut and focused on their potential to trigger an additional host defense pathway in the intestine. Human jejunal crypts, especially those from individuals with obesity, responded to bitter agonists by inducing the release of antimicrobial peptides (α-defensin 5 and regenerating islet-derived protein 3 α [REG3A]) but also regulated the expression of other innate immune factors (mucins, chemokines) that affected E. coli growth. We found that the effect of aloin on E. coli growth and on the release of the mucus glycoprotein CLCA1, identified via proteomics, was affected by TAS2R43 deletion polymorphisms and thus confirmed a role for TAS2R43. RNA-Seq revealed that denatonium benzoate induced an NRF2-mediated nutrient stress response and an unfolded protein response that increased the expression of the mitokine GDF15 but also ADM2 and LDLR, genes that are involved in anorectic signaling and lipid homeostasis. In conclusion, TAS2Rs in the intestine constitute a promising target for treating diseases that involve disturbances in the innate immune system and body weight control. TAS2R polymorphisms may be valuable genetic markers to predict therapeutic responses.

Role of ghrelin in the relationship between hyperphagia and accelerated gastric emptying in diabetic mice.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Ghrelin is an orexigenic peptide with gastroprokinetic effects. Mice with streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes exhibit hyperphagia, altered gastric emptying, and increased plasma ghrelin levels. We investigated the causative role of ghrelin herein by comparing changes in ghrelin receptor knockout (growth hormone secretagogue receptor [GHS-R](-/-)) and wild-type (GHS-R(+/+)) mice with STZ-induced diabetes. METHODS: Gastric emptying was measured with the [(13)C]octanoic acid breath test. The messenger RNA (mRNA) expression of neuropeptide Y (NPY), agouti-related peptide (AgRP), and proopiomelanocortin was quantified by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Neural contractions were elicited by electrical field stimulation in fundic smooth muscle strips. RESULTS: Diabetes increased plasma ghrelin levels to a similar extent in both genotypes. Hyperphagia was more pronounced in GHS-R(+/+) than in GHS-R(-/-) mice between days 12 and 21. Increases in NPY and AgRP mRNA expression were less pronounced in diabetic GHS-R(-/-) than in GHS-R(+/+) mice from day 15 on, whereas decreases in proopiomelanocortin mRNA levels were similar in both genotypes. Gastric emptying was accelerated to a similar extent in both genotypes, starting on day 16. In fundic smooth muscle strips of diabetic GHS-R(+/+) and GHS-R(-/-) mice, neuronal relaxations were reduced, whereas contractions were increased; this increase was related to an increased affinity of muscarinic and tachykinergic receptors. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic hyperphagia is regulated by central mechanisms in which the ghrelin-signaling pathway affects the expression of NPY and AgRP in the hypothalamus. The acceleration of gastric emptying, which is not affected by ghrelin signaling, is not the cause of diabetic hyperphagia and probably involves local contractility changes in the fundus.

Comparison of the gastroprokinetic effects of ghrelin, GHRP-6 and motilin in rats in vivo and in vitro.

UNLABELLED: Ghrelin and motilin form a new family of structurally related peptides. We compared the gastroprokinetic effects of ghrelin, the ghrelin receptor agonist, growth hormone releasing peptide 6 (GHRP-6), and motilin in rats in vivo and in vitro. METHODS: Ghrelin, GHRP-6 or motilin (10-150 microg/kg) were injected i.p. and the effects on gastric emptying and transit were measured after intragastric application of Evans blue. In antral and fundic strips the effect of motilin, ghrelin or GHRP-6 was studied during electrical field stimulation (EFS) in the absence and presence of N(G)-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester hydrochloride (l-NAME) (300 microM). RESULTS: Ghrelin and GHRP-6 but not motilin accelerated gastric emptying and transit in rats. Ghrelin was more potent than GHRP-6 and the dose-response relationship for ghrelin but not for GHRP-6 was bell-shaped. In fundic or antral strips, neural responses to EFS consisted of an on-relaxation that was reversed into a cholinergically mediated contraction by addition of the nitric oxide (NO)-synthase blocker, l-NAME. The post-stimulus off-contraction was cholinergically mediated. Under normal conditions, the ghrelin agonists reduced the on-relaxations in fundic strips and increased the cholinergic off-contractions in antral and fundic strips. The concentration response curves in muscle strips of the fundus were bell-shaped with maximal effects for ghrelin at 1.2 microM (on-responses) and 0.66 microM (off-responses) and for GHRP-6 at 0.50 microM (on-responses) and 0.26 microM (off-responses). No effects were observed with motilin between 1 nM and 0.1 microM. Studies in the presence of l-NAME confirmed the effect of the ghrelin agonists on cholinergic excitatory motor responses. No effects were observed with motilin under the different experimental conditions. The presence of growth hormone secretagogue receptor 1a transcripts in the strip preparations was confirmed by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). CONCLUSION: Ghrelin and GHRP-6 but not motilin accelerate gastric emptying and transit by activating cholinergic excitatory pathways in the enteric nervous system in addition to the known vagal pathways.

Mechanisms involved in the loss of excitatory post-stimulus responses by inflammation.

AIM: Electrical stimulation of colonic muscles elicits a response during the stimulation period, and a transient excitation after the stimulus. Post-stimulus or "rebound" excitation has been linked to pathways involving inhibitory neurotransmitters, prostaglandins and substance P but the mechanism is incompletely understood. Because rabbit colitis is characterized by a loss of inhibitory neurotransmission we hypothesized it might affect the rebound response. Therefore we characterized rebound responses in non-inflamed and inflamed tissue by comparing the effect of antagonists/blockers of putative (nitric oxide [NO], ATP, substance P, prostaglandins) and new (serotonin) neurotransmitters. METHODS: Strips from rabbits with colitis induced by 2,4,6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid (TNBS) were subjected to electrical field stimulation. Because rebound responses are more prominent under nonadrenergic noncholinergic (NANC) conditions, the effect of specific antagonists (N(omega)-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME), indomethacin, SR140333, methiothepin) on the rebound response was compared under normal and NANC conditions. RESULTS: NANC-conditions increased rebound responses in non-inflamed strips, but this effect was reduced or abolished in inflamed strips. Rebound responses were reduced by pretreatment with the NO-synthase inhibitor, L-NAME, under NANC conditions in non-inflamed strips but not affected in inflamed tissue. In contrast, the P(2) purine receptor antagonist, suramin, did not affect rebound responses in inflamed and non-inflamed strips. The effect of the cyclo-oxygenase inhibitor (COX), indomethacin, on rebound responses was reversed from excitatory to inhibitory by inflammation. Under NANC conditions rebound contractions were also reduced by the neurokinin-1 (NK(1)) antagonist, SR140333, both in normal and inflamed strips. The most pronounced reduction in rebound responses in inflamed and non-inflamed strips under normal conditions was observed with the 5-hydroxytryptamin (1,2) (5-HT(1,2)) antagonist, methiothepin. CONCLUSION: Rebound responses are mainly non-cholinergic and involve NO, substance P, serotonin and inhibitory prostaglandins. In inflamed tissue the nitrergic pathway is absent, excitatory prostaglandins prevail and the cholinergic and tachykinergic components are relatively more important. However there remains an important serotonergic contribution. Our data suggest that inflammation damages different neural pathways to a different extent and is most selective for nitrergic pathways.

Interaction of the growth hormone-releasing peptides ghrelin and growth hormone-releasing peptide-6 with the motilin receptor in the rabbit gastric antrum.

The structural relationship between the motilin and the growth hormone secretagogue receptor (GHS-R), and between their respective ligands, motilin and ghrelin, prompted us to investigate whether ghrelin and the GHS-R agonist growth hormone-releasing peptide-6 (GHRP-6), could interact with the motilin receptor. The interaction was evaluated in the rabbit gastric antrum with binding studies on membrane preparations and with contraction studies on muscle strips in the presence of selective antagonists under conditions of electrical field stimulation (EFS) or not. Binding studies indicated that the affinity (pK(d)) for the motilin receptor was in the order of ghrelin (4.23 +/- 0.07) < GHRP-6 (5.54 +/- 0.08) < motilin (9.13 +/- 0.03). The interaction of ghrelin with the motilin receptor requires the octanoyl group. Motilin induced smooth muscle contractile responses but ghrelin and GHRP-6 were ineffective. EFS elicited on- and off-responses that were increased by motilin already at 10(-9) M, but not by 10(-5) M ghrelin. In contrast, GHRP-6 also enhanced the on- and off-responses. The motilin antagonist Phe-cyclo[Lys-Tyr(3-tBu)-betaAla-] trifluoroacetate (GM-109) blocked the effect of GHRP-6 on the off-responses but not on the on-responses. Under nonadrenergic noncholinergic conditions, the effects of motilin and GHRP-6 on the on-responses were abolished; those on the off-responses were preserved. All responses were blocked by neurokinin (NK)(1) and NK(2) antagonists. In conclusion, ghrelin is unable to induce contractions via the motilin receptor. However, GHRP-6 enhances neural contractile responses, partially via interaction with the motilin receptor on noncholinergic nerves with tachykinins as mediator, and partially via another receptor that may be a GHS-R subtype on cholinergic nerves that corelease tachykinins.