Comparative Effects of the Long-Acting GLP-1 Receptor Ligands, Liraglutide and Exendin-4, on Food Intake and Body Weight Suppression in Rats

Department of Psychology, School of Arts and Sciences, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Obesity (Impact Factor: 4.39). 03/2011; 19(7):1342-9. DOI: 10.1038/oby.2011.50
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, liraglutide (Victoza) and the synthetic product of exendin-4 (Byetta), are approved for type II diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment and may be efficacious in obesity treatment as well, in part, due to the drugs' resistance to enzymatic degradation and prolonged half-life relative to endogenous GLP-1. To address the need to directly compare the food intake- and body weight-suppressive effects of these two GLP-1R ligands, acute and chronic dosing experiments were performed. Once-daily (q.d.) exendin-4 (0, 0.33, 1.5, and 3.0 µg/kg) and liraglutide (0, 50, 100, and 300 µg/kg, q.d.) both reduced the chow intake in nonobese rats in a dose-dependent fashion following either intraperitoneal (IP) or subcutaneous (SC) administration, whereas only liraglutide reduced 24 and 48 h body weight in nonobese, chow-maintained rats. Chow intake and body weight suppression by liraglutide were of greater magnitude and shorter latency following IP compared to SC delivery, whereas for exendin-4, the magnitude of intake-suppression was similar for IP and SC administration. The effects of chronic delivery (7 consecutive days; IP) of liraglutide (25 and 50 µg/kg; q.d.) and exendin-4 (3 µg/kg; q.d. and twice-daily (b.i.d.)) on food intake and body weight were also examined in diet-induced obese (DIO) rats. Liraglutide (50 µg/kg q.d.) and exendin-4 (3 µg/kg b.i.d.) were comparable in suppressing overall high fat/sucrose diet (HFS; 60% kcal from fat) intake. Both drugs regimens yielded marked weight loss over the 7-day period. The weight loss effect of liraglutide was achieved in the first 2 days and remained stable for the duration of the experiment; weight loss with exendin-4 appeared more linear over the 7-day period. In conclusion, administration of the GLP-1R ligands, exendin-4 (b.i.d.) and liraglutide (q.d.), lead to comparable and pronounced suppression of food intake and body weight in DIO rats, suggesting a potential role for these drugs as a clinical tool for obesity treatment.

Download full-text


Available from: Harvey Grill, Jun 16, 2015
1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Central glucagon-like-peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor activation reduces food intake; however, brain nuclei and mechanism(s) mediating this effect remain poorly understood. Although central nervous system GLP-1 is produced almost exclusively in the nucleus of the solitary tract in the hindbrain, GLP-1 receptors (GLP-1R) are expressed throughout the brain, including nuclei in the mesolimbic reward system (MRS), e.g. the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and the nucleus accumbens (NAc). Here, we examine the MRS as a potential site of action for GLP-1-mediated control of food intake and body weight. Double immunohistochemistry for Fluorogold (monosynaptic retrograde tracer) and GLP-1 neuron immunoreactivity indicated that GLP-1-producing nucleus tractus solitarius neurons project directly to the VTA, the NAc core, and the NAc shell. Pharmacological data showed that GLP-1R activation in the VTA, NAc core, and NAc shell decreased food intake, especially of highly-palatable foods, and body weight. Moreover, blockade of endogenous GLP-1R signaling in the VTA and NAc core resulted in a significant increase in food intake, establishing a physiological relevance for GLP-1 signaling in the MRS. Current data highlight these nuclei within the MRS as novel sites for GLP-1R-mediated control of food intake and body weight.
    Endocrinology 11/2011; 153(2):647-58. DOI:10.1210/en.2011-1443 · 4.64 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is produced by and released from the small intestine following ingestion of nutrients. GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists applied peripherally or centrally decrease food intake and increase glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. These effects make the GLP-1 system an attractive target for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity. In addition to these more frequently studied effects of GLP-1R stimulation, previous reports indicate that GLP-1R agonists suppress water intake. The present experiments were designed to provide greater temporal resolution and site specificity for the effect of GLP-1 and the long-acting GLP-1R agonists, exendin-4 and liraglutide, on unstimulated water intake when food was and was not available. All three GLP-1R ligands suppressed water intake after peripheral intraperitoneal administration, both in the presence of and the absence of food; however, the magnitude and time frame of water intake suppression varied by drug. GLP-1 had an immediate, but transient, hypodipsic effect when administered peripherally, whereas the water intake suppression by IP exendin-4 and liraglutide was much more persistent. Additionally, intracerebroventricular administration of GLP-1R agonists suppressed water intake when food was absent, but the suppression of intake showed modest differences depending on whether the drug was administered to the lateral or fourth ventricle. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of GLP-1 receptor agonists affecting unstimulated, overnight intake in the absence of food, the first test for antidipsogenic effects of hindbrain application of GLP-1 receptor agonists, and the first test of a central effect (forebrain or hindbrain) of liraglutide on water intake. Overall, these results show that GLP-1R agonists have a hypodipsic effect that is independent of GLP-1R-mediated effects on food intake, and this occurs, in part, through central nervous system GLP-1R activation.
    AJP Regulatory Integrative and Comparative Physiology 12/2011; 301(6):R1755-64. DOI:10.1152/ajpregu.00472.2011 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the substantial impact of sleep disturbances on human health and the many years of study dedicated to understanding sleep pathologies, the underlying genetic mechanisms that govern sleep and wake largely remain unknown. Recently, the authors completed large-scale genetic and gene expression analyses in a segregating inbred mouse cross and identified candidate causal genes that regulate the mammalian sleep-wake cycle, across multiple traits including total sleep time, amounts of rapid eye movement (REM), non-REM, sleep bout duration, and sleep fragmentation. Here the authors describe a novel approach toward validating candidate causal genes, while also identifying potential targets for sleep-related indications. Select small-molecule antagonists and agonists were used to interrogate candidate causal gene function in rodent sleep polysomnography assays to determine impact on overall sleep architecture and to evaluate alignment with associated sleep-wake traits. Significant effects on sleep architecture were observed in validation studies using compounds targeting the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M3 subunit (Chrm3) (wake promotion), nicotinic acetylcholine receptor alpha4 subunit (Chrna4) (wake promotion), dopamine receptor D5 subunit (Drd5) (sleep induction), serotonin 1D receptor (Htr1d) (altered REM fragmentation), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (Glp1r) (light sleep promotion and reduction of deep sleep), and calcium channel, voltage-dependent, T type, alpha 1I subunit (Cacna1i) (increased bout duration of slow wave sleep). Taken together, these results show the complexity of genetic components that regulate sleep-wake traits and highlight the importance of evaluating this complex behavior at a systems level. Pharmacological validation of genetically identified putative targets provides a rapid alternative to generating knock out or transgenic animal models, and may ultimately lead towards new therapeutic opportunities.
    Journal of neurogenetics 12/2011; 25(4):167-81. DOI:10.3109/01677063.2011.628426 · 1.38 Impact Factor
Show more