Gastric bypass surgery is associated with near-normal insulin suppression of lipolysis in nondiabetic individuals.

We hypothesized that individuals who have undergone gastric bypass have greater insulin sensitivity that obese subjects but less compared with lean. We measured free fatty acid (FFA) and glucose kinetics during a two-step, hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp in nondiabetic subjects who were 38 ± 5 mo post-gastric bypass surgery (GB; n = 15), in lean subjects (L; n = 15), and in obese subjects (O; n = 16). Fasting FFAa were not significantly different between the three study groups but during both doses of insulin were significantly higher in O than in either GB or L. The effective insulin concentration resulting in half-maximal suppression of FFA was similar in L and GB and significantly less in both groups compared with O. Glucose infusion rates during low-dose insulin were not significantly different in GB compared with either L or O. During high-dose insulin, glucose infusion rates were significantly greater in GB than in O but less than in L. Endogenous glucose production in GB was significantly lower than O only during low dose of insulin. We conclude that gastric bypass is associated with improvements in adipose tissue insulin sensitivity to levels similar to lean, healthy persons and also with improvements in the response of glucose metabolism to insulin. These changes may be due to preferential reduction in visceral fat and decreased FFA availability. However, some differences in insulin sensitivity in GB remain compared with L. Residual insulin resistance may be related to excess total body fat or abnormal lipolysis and requires further study.

Two years of treatment with dehydroepiandrosterone does not improve insulin secretion, insulin action, or postprandial glucose turnover in elderly men or women.

To determine if dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) replacement improves insulin secretion, insulin action, and/or postprandial glucose metabolism, 112 elderly subjects with relative DHEA deficiency ingested a labeled mixed meal and underwent a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test before and after 2 years of either DHEA or placebo. Despite restoring DHEA sulphate concentrations to values observed in young men and women, the changes over time in fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations, meal appearance, glucose disposal, and endogenous glucose production were identical to those observed after 2 years of placebo. The change over time in postmeal and intravenous glucose tolerance test insulin and C-peptide concentrations did not differ in men treated with DHEA or placebo. In contrast, postmeal and intravenous glucose tolerance test change over time in insulin and C-peptide concentrations were greater (P < 0.05) in women after DHEA than after placebo. However, since DHEA tended to decrease insulin action, the change over time in disposition indexes did not differ between DHEA- and placebo-treated women, indicating that the slight increase in insulin secretion was a compensatory response to a slight decrease in insulin action. We conclude that 2 years of replacement of DHEA in elderly men and women does not improve insulin secretion, insulin action, or the pattern of postprandial glucose metabolism.

DHEA in elderly women and DHEA or testosterone in elderly men.

BACKGROUND: Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and testosterone are widely promoted as antiaging supplements, but the long-term benefits, as compared with potential harm, are unknown. METHODS: We performed a 2-year, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind study involving 87 elderly men with low levels of the sulfated form of DHEA and bioavailable testosterone and 57 elderly women with low levels of sulfated DHEA. Among the men, 29 received DHEA, 27 received testosterone, and 31 received placebo. Among the women, 27 received DHEA and 30 received placebo. Outcome measures included physical performance, body composition, bone mineral density (BMD), glucose tolerance, and quality of life. RESULTS: As compared with the change from baseline to 24 months in the placebo group, subjects who received DHEA for 2 years had an increase in plasma levels of sulfated DHEA by a median of 3.4 microg per milliliter (9.2 micromol per liter) in men and by 3.8 microg per milliliter (10.3 micromol per liter) in women. Among men who received testosterone, the level of bioavailable testosterone increased by a median of 30.4 ng per deciliter (1.1 nmol per liter), as compared with the change in the placebo group. A separate analysis of men and women showed no significant effect of DHEA on body-composition measurements. Neither hormone altered the peak volume of oxygen consumed per minute, muscle strength, or insulin sensitivity. Men who received testosterone had a slight increase in fat-free mass, and men in both treatment groups had an increase in BMD at the femoral neck. Women who received DHEA had an increase in BMD at the ultradistal radius. Neither treatment improved the quality of life or had major adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Neither DHEA nor low-dose testosterone replacement in elderly people has physiologically relevant beneficial effects on body composition, physical performance, insulin sensitivity, or quality of life. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00254371 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Effects of pioglitazone versus glipizide on body fat distribution, body water content, and hemodynamics in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Pioglitazone, a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor agonist and glipizide, an insulin secretagogue, are commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes. Our study was designed to examine the effects of pioglitazone versus glipizide on body water, body composition, and hemodynamic parameters in the presence of comparable glycemic control between groups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied 19 diabetic subjects randomly assigned to either 45 mg pioglitazone (n = 8) or 10 mg (median dose) glipizide (n = 11) for 12 weeks. Body water content was measured with deuterated water, body composition by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and computed tomography, and cardiac output and systemic vascular resistance by acetylene rebreathing technique both before and after therapy. RESULTS: Pioglitazone increased (P < 0.001 from baseline) total body water (+2.4 +/- 0.5 l) accounting for 75% of the total weight gain (+3.1 +/- 2.0 kg) but did not alter vascular endothelial growth factor concentrations. Total abdominal (-32.2 +/- 19 cm(2)) and visceral fat area (-16.1 +/- 8 cm(2)) tended to decrease with pioglitazone but increased (P < 0.02 for differences between groups) with glipizide (+38.4 +/- 17 cm(2) abdominal; +19.1 +/- 9 cm(2) visceral). Pioglitazone tended to reduce (P = 0.05) diastolic (-8.4 +/- 4 mmHg) and mean (-9.5 +/- 5 mmHg; P = 0.08) blood pressure and reduced (P < 0.001) systemic vascular resistance (2,785 +/- 336 vs. 2,227 +/- 136 dynes/s per m(2)), while there were no differences in these parameters with glipizide. Neither therapy altered circulating catecholamine concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: When pioglitazone and glipizide are given in doses sufficient to achieve equivalent glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes, pioglitazone increases total body water, thereby accounting for the majority of weight gain, tended to decrease visceral and abdominal fat content and blood pressure, and reduces systemic vascular resistance.