C Molena-Fernandes1, C A Bersani-Amado2, Z M Ferraro3, L J Hintze4, N Nardo3, R K N Cuman2. 1. Colegiado de Educação Física, Universidade Estadual do Paraná, Paranavaí, PR, Brasil. 2. Departamento de Farmácia e Farmacologia, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, PR, Brasil. 3. Healthy Active Living and Obesity Research Group, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 4. Departamento de Educação Física, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, PR, Brasil.
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the effects of aerobic exercise training (4 days) and metformin exposure on acute glucose intolerance after dexamethasone treatment in rats. Forty-two adult male Wistar rats (8 weeks old) were divided randomly into four groups: sedentary control (SCT), sedentary dexamethasone-treated (SDX), training dexamethasone-treated (DPE), and dexamethasone and metformin treated group (DMT). Glucose tolerance tests and in situ liver perfusion were undertaken on fasting rats to obtain glucose profiles. The DPE group displayed a significant decrease in glucose values compared with the SDX group. Average glucose levels in the DPE group did not differ from those of the DMT group, so we suggest that exercise training corrects dexamethasone-induced glucose intolerance and improves glucose profiles in a similar manner to that observed with metformin. These data suggest that exercise may prevent the development of glucose intolerance induced by dexamethasone in rats to a similar magnitude to that observed after metformin treatment.
We aimed to evaluate the effects of aerobic exercise training (4 days) and metformin exposure on acute glucose intolerance after dexamethasone treatment in rats. Forty-two adult male Wistar rats (8 weeks old) were divided randomly into four groups: sedentary control (SCT), sedentary dexamethasone-treated (SDX), training dexamethasone-treated (DPE), and dexamethasone and metformin treated group (DMT). Glucose tolerance tests and in situ liver perfusion were undertaken on fasting rats to obtain glucose profiles. The DPE group displayed a significant decrease in glucose values compared with the SDX group. Average glucose levels in the DPE group did not differ from those of the DMT group, so we suggest that exercise training corrects dexamethasone-induced glucose intolerance and improves glucose profiles in a similar manner to that observed with metformin. These data suggest that exercise may prevent the development of glucose intolerance induced by dexamethasone in rats to a similar magnitude to that observed after metformin treatment.
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is characterized by a hyperglycemic postprandial state due to a
partial or total absence of insulin released by pancreatic beta cells, peripheral
resistance to insulin, or both (1). Type 2
diabetes (DM2) comprises the highest incidence among the different classes of DM, and
accounts for approximately 90% of cases (2,3). The number of DM2 cases has increased rapidly
and has reached epidemic proportions worldwide (4,5). Hence, DM has become a major
public health problem. The prevalence of DM2 in the general population, whether in
developed or developing countries, varies between 3% and 7%. About 177 million people
have DM worldwide, and this number is expected to double by 2030 (3,5).The onset of DM2 occurs over a variable time period and progresses from an intermediate
stage known as “impaired glucose tolerance” or “glucose intolerance” (1,6) and may
evolve to clinical presentation of DM. Glucose intolerance, a major risk factor for
development of DM2, and rate of DM progression in people with glucose intolerance,
varies from 4% to 8% a year in different populations (7). There are several known risk factors for development of DM2: advanced
age, obesity, unhealthy dietary habits, and lack of physical activity (8). Indeed, lifestyle modification is cited as the
“gold standard” management for inhibiting development of DM2 in high-risk individuals
with glucose intolerance. Clinical trials have reported the beneficial effects of
lifestyle intervention programs in high-risk diabetes-prone individuals (9-11). Data
from the Diabetes Prevention Program Group (10)
and American Diabetes Association (1)
demonstrated that changes in eating habits and increased physical activity resulted in a
diminished risk of DM2 progression (60%) in individuals with glucose intolerance after 3
years of intervention. Similarly, other studies have demonstrated that physical
activity, decreased obesity, and insulin resistance can prevent DM2 (10-12).
However, the effect of physical activity compared with metformin on the improvement of
glucose tolerance has not been investigated thoroughly (5,13,14).Experimental data have demonstrated that aerobic physical exercise reduces levels of
glucose in the tissues of control and diabeticrats (15-20). However, few studies assessing
the effects of physical exercise in experimental models of acute hyperglycemia have been
conducted. Thus, the influence of aerobic physical exercise and metformin on development
of acute glucose intolerance in rats was evaluated.
Material and Methods
Animals
Adult male Wistar rats (200-250 g) were housed at 22±2°C under a 12-h dark-light
cycle, and given a standard pelleted diet and water ad
libitumthroughout the experimental period. The experimental protocol was
approved by the Animal Ethics Committee of Universidade de Maringá (CEEA, #033/2007).
The animals included in the study were weighed every day during the experimental
period.
Experimental procedures
Animals (n=42) were divided randomly into four experimental groups. The sedentary
control group (SCT; n=8) was treated with 0.9% NaCl solution (sc,
for 4 days) without any swimming activity. The sedentary dexamethasone group (SDX;
n=12) was treated with 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone (DEXA, sc, daily, for
4 days) without any swimming activity. The DEXA-treated and physical exercise group
(DPE; n=10) was treated with 0.1 mg/kg DEXA (sc, daily, for 4 days)
with swimming activity (4 days, 1 h/day). Finally, the DEXA and metformin (MET)
treated group (DMT; n=12) was treated with 0.1 mg/kg DEXA (sc,daily,
for 4 days) and MET (300 mg·kg−1·day−1; gavage, for 4 days).
All treatments ended 1 day before the experiments (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Experimental design. GTT: glucose tolerance test.
Model of dexamethasone-induced acute hyperglycemia
To mimic the disease observed in prediabetes and DM2, DEXA was administered to
animals by subcutaneous injection (0.1 mg/kg body weight) during 4 days to induce
acute hyperglycemia. Control animals were given 0.9% NaCl during 4 days. A fasted
glucose tolerance test (GTT) was undertaken on animals to determine glucose
intolerance.
Intravenous GTT
All rats were fasted for 24 h and then anesthetized (sodium pentobarbital, 40 mg/kg
body weight, ip). After laparotomy, sequential blood samples were
collected from the abdominal aorta immediately before glucose challenge (0.5 g
glucose/kg body weight, iv) as well as 5, 15, 30, and 60 min
thereafter. After centrifugation at 1350 g for 5 min at 4°C, 20 µL
of serum was used immediately for glucose with a Gold Analisa Diagnóstica kit (Gold
Analisa Diagnóstica, Brazil). The within-assay coefficient of variation was 1.2% and
the between-assay coefficient of variation was 2.7%.
In situ liver perfusion
Male albino Wistar rats (n=42; 180-220 g) were fed ad libitumwith a
standard laboratory diet (Purina¯, Brazil). Food was withdrawn 18 h before
liver-perfusion experiments. Rats were manipulated according to international laws
for ethical care and use (European Communities Council Directive of 24 November 1986,
86/609/EEC), conforming to national guidelines. Animals were anesthetized using
sodium pentobarbital (50 mg/kg, ip) for the surgical procedure for
liver isolation. Basal blood samples were collected before induction of any surgical
procedure, and the non-recirculating method was executed, as described previously
(21). In brief, after cannulation of the
portal and cava veins, the liver was positioned in a plexiglass chamber and a
peristaltic pump maintained constant flow. For the surgical procedure, the perfusion
fluid was Krebs-Henseleit bicarbonate buffer (pH 7.4) containing 25 mg% bovine-serum
albumin, saturated with a mixture of oxygen and carbon dioxide (95:5) by a
temperature-regulated (37°C) membrane oxygenator before liver penetration by a
cannula inserted in the portal vein. The perfusion flow was constant in each
individual experiment. It was adjusted between 30 mL/min and 35 mL/min depending on
liver weight. Samples of the effluent perfusion fluid were collected at 5-min
intervals and analyzed for glucose concentration by the glucose-oxidase method.
L-glutamine (5 mM) added to the perfusion fluid was used in all perfusion experiments
as a substratum to gluconeogenesis parameters. Glucose concentration in serum or
perfusate was determined by the glucose oxidase method (Gold Analisa Diagnóstica).
Serum glucose is reported as mg/dL and in the perfusate as
µmol·min−1·g−1.
Physical exercise protocol (swimming)
The exercise protocol comprised daily 60-min swimming sessions during 4 days. A load
equivalent to 5% of the body weight of the animal was attached to its tail. This
protocol is considered to be a low-to-moderate intensity activity of long duration
or, rather, a level of exercise sufficient to stimulate the onset of physiologic
adaptations (22,23).Individual swimming sessions were carried out in a 250 L rectangular water tank.
Animals were separated inside the tank by polyvinyl-chloride pipes, and the water
temperature was controlled by a thermostat maintained at 29±2°C. This temperature is
thermally neutral and reduces temperature-induced stressors caused by temperatures
above or below that of the environment. The water was changed after each exercise
session to avoid contamination by feces and urine excreted during training.Swimming was chosen as the exercise protocol because it is used frequently in rodent
models for this field of study. It also provides lesser psychological stress to
animals compared with that induced by a treadmill exercise (24).Animals underwent a 5-day adaptation period: adaptation in liquid medium on the first
day (15 min, without a load); 30 min of swimming without a load on the second day; 60
min without a load on the third day; 30 min with loads equivalent to 5% of body
weight attached to the tail on the fourth day and, lastly, adaptation to 45 min and a
load of 5% on the fifth day. Dexamethasone treatment commenced from the sixth day of
training. Animals swam during a 4-day period, and the tests described above were then
carried out on the fifth day (GTT and liver perfusion).
Statistical analysis
Results are reported as means±SE. Between-group differences were analyzed using
one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey's test for multiple
comparisons to identify where potential differences existed. Paired
t-tests were used to identify significant weight-related
differences that emerged as a result of each treatment. P<0.05 was considered
significant. Statistical analysis was carried out using GraphPad Prism¯ v5.0
(Microsoft, USA). The area under the curve (AUC) was calculated using the AUC feature
in this software.
Results
Although the control group did exhibit changes in body weight, a significant decrease in
body weight was reported in the remaining groups at the end of the experiment. This
decrease was greater for sedentary and dexamethasone-treated animals compared with
trained and metformin-treated rats (Table
1).
Figure 2A and B shows glucose-concentration
profiles during the GTT. Average baseline glucose concentrations (before intravenous
injection of glucose) were 110.1±2.25 mg/dL for the SCT group, 164.7±4.45 mg/dL for the
SDX group, 157.5±4.16 mg/dL for the DMT group, and 137.4±8 mg/dL for the DPE group.
Average glucose values in exercising animals were significantly lower than those in the
SDX group. A similar trend was reported 5, 10, 20, 30, and 60 min after intravenous
injection of glucose, so physical exercise had a significant effect on decrease in
glucose levels.
Figure 2
Glucose tolerance test (GTT) carried out in different groups of rats. SCT:
Sedentary control group (n=8) treated with 0.9% NaCl solution
(sc, for 4 days) without swimming activity. SDX: Sedentary
dexamethasone group (n=12) treated with 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone (DEXA,
sc, daily, for 4 days), without swimming activity. DPE:
DEXA-treated physical exercise group (n=10) treated with 0.1 mg/kg DEXA
(sc, daily, for 4 days), with swimming activity (4 days, 1
h/day). DMT: DEXA and metformin (MET) treated group (n=12) treated with MET (300
mg·kg−1·day−1; gavage, for 4 days), without swimming
activity. A, Data are reported as means±SE. B,
Data are reported as the mean area under the curve±SE for each group.
#P<0.001 compared with the SCT group. *P<0.01 compared with the
SDX group (ANOVA followed by Tukey's test).
The DPE group presented a significant decrease in glucose values compared with those of
the SDX group during GTT at all time-points, with values similar to those of the control
group. These findings suggest that physical exercise through swimming prevented the
development of dexamethasone-induced glucose intolerance in Wistar rats. Furthermore,
average glucose values in the DPE group were not significantly different compared with
those of the DMT group. This finding demonstrated that physical activity can correct
dexamethasone-induced hyperglycemia (glucose intolerance) in rats and can improve their
glucose profile, as has been observed with metformin.An increased glucose concentration obtained from the AUC during GTT (Figure 2B) was observed in the SDX group (2909±251.2
mg/dL) compared with that obtained from the SCT group (1531±195.6 mg/dL). In fact, DMT
(1821±170.2 mg/dL) and DPE (1901±187.3 mg/dL) groups showed reduced levels of glucose in
blood compared with the SDX group.Given that the livers of fasting rats were used for experiments, L-glutamine served as
the gluconeogenic substrate. Liver production of glucose was reduced in the control
group at the start of perfusion (first 10 min) because the substrate had not yet been
infused (Figure 3A). However, high rates of
glucose perfusion were observed in DMT and DPE groups compared with that obtained in the
control group (albeit reduced when compared with that of the SDX group). After perfusion
of L-glutamine, an increase in glucose concentration was observed and related to
gluconeogenesis pathways. This effect was reported in the SDX and DMT groups, but not in
control and DPE groups. Five minutes after glutamine infusion, glucose production
decreased. However, in the DMT and DPE groups, glucose concentrations were lower than
those of the SDX group, and an increase in glucose production was observed in the
control group. These data suggest that physical exercise and metformin treatment have
protective effects on the onset of acute glucose intolerance and reduce production of
glucose in the liver.
Figure 3
Hepatic production of glucose in different animal groups. SCT: Sedentary
control group (n=8) treated with 0.9% NaCl solution (sc, for 4
days) without swimming activity. SDX: Sedentary dexamethasone group (n=12) treated
with 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone (DEXA, sc,daily, for 4 days),
without swimming activity. DPE: DEXA-treated physical exercise group (n=10)
treated with 0.1 mg/kg DEXA (sc,daily, for 4 days), with swimming
activity (4 days, 1 h/day). DMT: DEXA and metformin (MET) treated group (n=12)
treated with MET (300 mg·kg−1·day−1; gavage, for 4 days),
without swimming activity. A, Data are reported as means±SE.
B, Data are reported as the mean area under the curve±SE.
#P<0.01 compared with the SCT group. *P<0.01 compared with the
SDX group (ANOVA followed by Tukey's test).
Data from the AUC obtained from in situ liver perfusion curves (Figure 3B) demonstrated that the SDX group
(6.466±0.646) displayed an area that was larger than that obtained in the control group
(1.531±195.6). DPE (3.300±0.276) and DMT (2.713±0.296) groups showed similar glucose
concentrations to those obtained from the metformin-treated trained group, suggesting
that physical exercise reduced glucose production in the liver and glucose intolerance
with the same efficacy after metformin treatment.
Discussion
The present study sought to compare the acute effects of aerobic exercise and metformin
treatment on glycemic control in Wistar rats. We aimed to validate the literature and
provide comparative experimental evidence using a modern anti-diabeticbiguanide that is
the first-line choice in DM treatment. To date, various animal models have been used to
study DM and its therapies, with some treatments producing negative side effects. For
instance, alloxan- and streptozotocin-induced treatments have revealed irreversible
lesions in pancreatic beta cells, thereby promoting failed production of insulin and
diabetic status (4,20). In many experimental studies (15-20,25,26), acute and chronic adaptations
to physical exercise have been demonstrated. However, few studies have been designed to
specifically compare the protective effects of physical exercise and metformin on acute
hyperglycemia induced by dexamethasone. Furthermore, gain in body weight was determined
every day throughout the study period. However, an increase in body weight was observed
only in the control group; a significant decrease was noted in the other groups.
Collectively, however, the present study corroborates findings from other investigations
suggesting that dexamethasone treatment induces a decrease in the body weight of exposed
animals (27,28). The reducing effect dexamethasone treatment has on body weight has been
stated to occur (at least in part) through several related factors: suppression of
synthesis of muscle protein; increased protein catabolism; increased energy expenditure;
decreased intake of food (29,30). The mechanisms responsible for
glucocorticoid-stimulated metabolic disorders (including those induced by dexamethasone)
are not well established. Symptoms associated with such treatment, including insomnia
and highly depressive moods, reduced memory, weight loss, and debilitation of the
organism, have been reported (31).The GTT undertaken in the present study suggested that after physical exercise, treated
rats and control rats showed a hypoglycemic state similar to those that underwent
metformin treatment with respect to glucose tolerance. This finding suggested improved
sensitivity to insulin, but we could not confirm quantitatively whether this change
resulted from higher levels of insulin production or an improved capacity of
insulin-sensitive tissues to uptake substrate. This was a limitation of our
investigation. Nonetheless, it has been demonstrated that physical exercise provides
immediate metabolic adjustment (acute adaptation) and chronic adjustment after a
practice period, thereby suggesting improvements in contraction-mediated insulin
sensitivity rather than an augmented insulin response after physical exertion. Exercise
requires higher energy demands to maintain homeostasis (3,12,23). Oxygen consumption during exercise increases about 20-fold, and glucose
utilization increases 7- to 20-fold, compared with that in non-exercised muscles (22), as may be observed after swimming sessions by
rats. In the present study, the effects of physical exercise on acute hyperglycemia may
have been related to the reduction in glucose content in tissues, as has been observed
in different experimental models of DM (15,16,20). For
instance, studies using molecular quantification showed that physical training increases
the activity of tyrosine kinase at insulin receptors, glucose transporters in skeletal
muscle (glucose transporter type 4), translocation and phosphorylation of substrates at
insulin receptors (IRS-1 and IRS-2) and its association with phosphoinositide3-kinase
(PI3-kinase) (32). In fact, molecular adaptations
for glucose regulation may be related to disease severity (26), as observed in models of dexamethasone-induced acute
hyperglycemia presenting with mild metabolic alterations.Moreover, we report a significant increase in hepatic production of glucose during
in situ liver perfusion for SDX, trained rats (DPE) and rats treated
with metformin (DMT). The increased hepatic levels of glucose observed in the
dexamethasone-treated group may have been related to the effect of glucocorticoids.
These hormones induce counter-regulatory effects on insulin and exert predominant
actions on intermediate metabolism, thereby affecting hepatic, muscle and adipose
tissues. The aforementioned class of hormones increases glucose levels, thereby limiting
peripheral consumption and production of glucose (33). In addition, glucocorticoids stimulate hepatic gluconeogenesis,
metabolize fatty acids and glycerol released from adipocytes, catabolize amino acids
from the inhibition of peripheral protein synthesis, and activate phosphoenolpyruvate
carboxykinase (rate-limiting enzyme responsible for gluconeogenic events) (34). Hence, with respect to our findings, we suggest
that dexamethasone treatment revealed persistent hyperglycemia as a consequence of
insulin resistance. Increased glucose levels during liver perfusion of
dexamethasone-treated animals were reduced after metformin treatment and physical
exercise. High glucose concentrations could be because glucocorticoids have
hyperglycemic and lipolytic effects and, therefore, diabetogenic and anti-insulin
actions (35,36). Furthermore, glucocorticoids may trigger persistent hyperglycemia
induced by glucagon, epinephrine and/or growth hormone (31).With regard to all the parameters evaluated in the present study (glucose intolerance
and hepatic production of glucose), the DPE group presented a glycemic profile similar
to that of the DMT group. This finding suggested a preventive effect on hyperglycemia
induced by glucocorticoids that is similar to that between metformin and physical
aerobic exercise. In general, it is accepted that physical exercise triggers metabolic
alterations and facilitates glucose transport into cells. Regular physical exercise is
important for glucose control in insulin-resistant individuals. Silveira et al. (37) reported that low exercise intensity for long
periods affects glucose control in non-insulin-dependent diabetic individuals. Moreover,
insulin economy evaluated during the GTT in overweight and obese individuals who are
active and subject to different intensities and duration of exercise has shown improved
results compared with those obtained in a sedentary group (38). Collectively, physical exercise is an optimal method to enhance
insulin economy and improve glycemic control in healthy and compromised individuals.Trained animals reduced their glucose levels after a GTT and liver perfusion compared
with those in the dexamethasone group. In addition, high blood and perfusate
concentrations of glucose in dexamethasone-treated sedentary rats were observed,
suggesting that regular physical exercise increased glucose uptake in peripheral and
hepatic tissues. These findings demonstrate a beneficial effect of physical training for
the improvement of insulin sensitivity. However, it is not clear which molecular
mechanisms are involved in the increased uptake of glucose by muscles. Further studies
must be completed to explain how the intensity, duration, and magnitude of exercise
differentially affect insulin-signaling pathways in experimental models of acute
hyperglycemia (12). We speculate, however, that
hemodynamic changes induced by physical exercise may be involved because a single
exercise session reduced sympathetic activity and increased muscle blood flow in the
post-exercise period compared with non-exercising controls. In fact, after a single
exercise session, hyperinsulinemia promotes diminished sympathetic activity even though
increased vasodilatation in muscles is observed as a consequence of hemodynamic changes
and insulin resistance is improved (39).Increased sensitivity to insulin observed after physical training seems to be a
consequence of an improved response of the insulin receptor to events occurring
downstream, specifically phosphorylation of proteins related to insulin signaling
hormones. The transduction signal at insulin receptors IRS-1 and IRS-2 coupled with
PI3-kinase activity is increased in the skeletal muscles of trained rats and in
non-diabetic, insulin-resistant and DM2humans (40). The exercise protocol used in the present study is, therefore, a
contribution to the literature because it avoids glucose intolerance by improving
insulin sensitivity in trained dexamethasone-treated animals. This phenomenon may be
because exercise practice promotes increased expression of glucose transporters and
up-regulates the enzyme activity linked to their metabolism. These two phenomena are
related to improved glucose tolerance (40).
Conversely, moderate exercise affects glucose metabolism in muscles and the
glycogen-synthase activity that may occur without alterations in insulin-signaling
cascades (40). Additionally, physical exercise
promotes the transport of glucose through increased levels of insulin-like growth
factor-1 without increasing the number of transporters in rats submitted to training for
8 weeks (26).Collectively, there are numerous, complex, and dynamic metabolic/molecular pathways
involved with improved tolerance to glucose because the latter is related to exercise
and glucose transport (32). Many studies have
shown the additional effects of insulin action and muscle contraction, and suggest that
insulin and exercise activate glucose transport by different mechanisms (32).Physical exercise (swimming) may be a viable form of therapy to prevent development of
glucose intolerance induced by dexamethasone, and may be comparable with the effects of
metformin. Physical exercise and metformin restored glucose tolerance, thus our results
suggest that exercise practice is a preventive activity that avoids the development of
glucose intolerance and DM2 onset if glucocorticoid therapies are used. Our results
suggest that the anti-diabetic medication metformin has similar efficacy to physical
exertion, without the added benefit of improved cardiorespiratory fitness.
Authors: R Minet-Quinard; C Moinard; S Walrand; F Villié; B Normand; M P Vasson; J Chopineau; L Cynober Journal: JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr Date: 2000 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: William C Knowler; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Sarah E Fowler; Richard F Hamman; John M Lachin; Elizabeth A Walker; David M Nathan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-02-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Eliete Luciano; Everardo M Carneiro; Carla R O Carvalho; José B C Carvalheira; Sidney B Peres; Marise A B Reis; Mario J A Saad; A Carlos Boschero; Licio A Velloso Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 6.664