| Literature DB >> 21589921 |
Martina Guthoff1, Krunoslav T Stingl, Otto Tschritter, Maja Rogic, Martin Heni, Katarina Stingl, Manfred Hallschmid, Hans-Ulrich Häring, Andreas Fritsche, Hubert Preissl, Anita M Hennige.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Insulin is an anorexigenic hormone that contributes to the termination of food intake in the postprandial state. An alteration in insulin action in the brain, named "cerebral insulin resistance", is responsible for overeating and the development of obesity. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21589921 PMCID: PMC3092755 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019482
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Metabolic parameters during MEG experiment (Insulin or placebo spray was given at time = 0 min).
| Placebo | Insulin | Placebo | Insulin | Placebo | Insulin | Placebo | Insulin | Placebo | Insulin | Placebo | Insulin | |
| Lean subjects | Obese subjects | Lean subjects | Obese subjects | Lean subjects | Obese subjects | |||||||
| Time (minutes) | Glucose (mmol/l) | Insulin (pmol/l) | C-Peptide (pmol/l) | |||||||||
| −30 | 4.7±0.1 | 4.6±0.1 | 5.2±0.1 | 5.1±0.1 | 39±5.6 | 34±3.9 | 59±10.3 | 68±11.9 | 360±36 | 336±34 | 520±53 | 609±52 |
| 0 | 4.7±0.1 | 4.8±0.1 | 5.3±0.2 | 5.3±0.2 | 33±5.5 | 33±5.1 | 61±11.8 | 62±11.4 | 379±53 | 336±39 | 554±69 | 584±62 |
| 30 | 4.4±0.1 | 4.6±0.1 | 5.0±0.1 | 5.0±0.1 | 33±4.8 | 41±5.8 | 70±15.9 | 88±15.5 | 345±36 | 314±38 | 535±66 | 595±82 |
| 60 | 4.4±0.1 | 4.6±0.1 | 5.1±0.2 | 5.1±0.1 | 32±6.8 | 34±4.8 | 65±12.1 | 66±9.1 | 372±51 | 289±29 | 555±67 | 544±68 |
| p-value (time* insulin/placebo) | 0.31 | 0.76 | 0.42 | 0.23 | 0.19 | 0.07 | ||||||
All data are given as mean ± SEM.
Statistical significance between insulin and placebo condition was performed using MANOVA analysis, univariate test and interaction effect.
The p-value time*insulin/placebo shows differences in the curves over time of insulin and placebo.
RMS and latency of the components M1 and M2 for the four experimental conditions.
| FF | NF | FN | NN | |
| RMS Lean-M1 (fT) | 57±4 | 60±3 | 53±3 | 52±3 |
| RMS Obese-M1 (fT) | 64±2 | 64±2 | 57±2 | 55±2 |
| RMS Lean-M2 (fT) | 72±3 | 77±3 | 63±2 | 63±2 |
| RMS Obese-M2 (fT) | 74±3 | 77±3 | 60±2 | 60±2 |
| Mean Latency Lean-M1 (ms) | 124±1 | 123±1 | 122±1 | 122±1 |
| Mean Latency Obese-M1 (ms) | 126±2 | 125±2 | 124±2 | 125±2 |
| Mean Latency Lean-M2 (ms) | 170±2 | 172±2 | 168±1 | 175±3 |
| Mean Latency Obese-M2 (ms) | 171±1 | 170±1 | 172±2 | 171±2 |
All data are given as mean ± SEM.
fT = femto Tesla, 10−15 Tesla.
Figure 1Basal evoked potentials in lean and obese subjects.
Time traces of evoked magnetic fields quantified by RMS for food and non-food conditions during the baseline measurement for lean (left) and obese subjects (right). The time point zero indicates the time when the “current” stimulus was shown. For lean and obese subjects, a significant difference in the M1 and M2 components were found for the factor “current” stimulus, e.g. an increase in M1 and M2 for food versus non-food stimulus.
Figure 2Evoked potentials before and after insulin application.
Time traces of evoked magnetic fields quantified by RMS for the measurements before (red line) and after intranasal (green line) insulin application. In the upper row, the response of lean (a) and obese (b) subjects to food stimuli as “current” stimulus are shown. In the lower row, the responses to non-food-pictures are shown (c: lean, d: obese). Only for lean subjects, a statistical significant difference between basal and insulin in the M2 component was found.
Figure 3Source analysis of the insulin effect.
Brain areas modulated by insulin administration during the working memory task in the food condition. Results are shown for the time period between 100 and 350 ms for all subject rendered onto the surface of a standard anatomical brain volume (Montreal Neurological Institute). All activations are significant at p<0.05 (FWR corrected).