Elsevier

Metabolism

Volume 59, Issue 4, April 2010, Pages 502-511
Metabolism

Effects of meal size and composition on incretin, α-cell, and β-cell responses

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2009.07.039Get rights and content

Abstract

The incretins glucagon-like peptide–1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) regulate postprandial insulin release from the β-cells. We investigated the effects of 3 standardized meals with different caloric and nutritional content in terms of postprandial glucose, insulin, glucagon, and incretin responses. In a randomized crossover study, 18 subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and 6 healthy volunteers underwent three 4-hour meal tolerance tests (small carbohydrate [CH]-rich meal, large CH-rich meal, and fat-rich meal). Non–model-based and model-based estimates of β-cell function and incremental areas under the curve of glucose, insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, GLP-1, and GIP were calculated. Mixed models and Friedman tests were used to test for differences in meal responses. The large CH-rich meal and fat-rich meal resulted in a slightly larger insulin response as compared with the small CH-rich meal and led to a slightly shorter period of hyperglycemia, but only in healthy subjects. Model-based insulin secretion estimates did not show pronounced differences between meals. Both in healthy individuals and in those with diabetes, more CH resulted in higher GLP-1 release. In contrast with the other meals, GIP release was still rising 2 hours after the fat-rich meal. The initial glucagon response was stimulated by the large CH-rich meal, whereas the fat-rich meal induced a late glucagon response. Fat preferentially stimulates GIP secretion, whereas CH stimulates GLP-1 secretion. Differences in meal size and composition led to differences in insulin and incretin responses but not to differences in postprandial glucose levels of the well-controlled patients with diabetes.

Introduction

The incretins glucagon-like peptide–1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) are hormones released from endocrine cells in the intestinal mucosa after a meal to regulate postprandial insulin release from the pancreatic β-cell. Because incretin function is known to be reduced or absent in patients with diabetes [1], whereas the insulinotropic effect of GLP-1 is preserved, there is substantial interest in dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-IV) inhibitors and GLP-1 analogs for controlling postprandial blood glucose levels in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Augmentation of the secretion of endogenous GLP-1 could be another approach; the effect of the composition of a meal on incretin levels and subsequent insulin, glucagon, and glucose concentrations is therefore of interest.

A mixed-meal test offers the potential for assessing insulin secretion during physiologically relevant situations and for evaluating the physiologic effects of incretins. The few studies that have examined incretin responses after one or more meals are not consistent about the contributions of meal composition and size in stimulating incretin and/or insulin secretion in patients with diabetes. A recent study showed that, in both healthy subjects and type 2 diabetes mellitus patients, GIP responses were higher after mixed-meal ingestion than after an oral glucose load, but GLP-1 levels were similar during both tests [2]. In a study with 5 healthy volunteers, the time course of plasma GIP concentrations paralleled the gastric emptying of fat and protein [3]. On the other hand, it has been reported that ingestion of fat before a carbohydrate (CH) meal attenuated the postprandial rises in GIP but stimulated GLP-1 in type 2 diabetes mellitus [4]. In a study comparing 50-g vs 100-g glucose loads in healthy individuals, GLP-1 and GIP were dose-dependently increased [5]. As for meal size, one study has demonstrated higher incretin and C-peptide responses after a large as compared with a small meal [6]. β-Cell glucose sensitivity, an estimate of β-cell function, tended to increase in obese individuals during a large meal, perhaps reflecting increased incretin response. However, the meal composition of the large and small meal was similar; therefore, the influence of the macronutrients could not be derived.

It is unknown how meals with different caloric content and CH/fat load compare with one another in subjects with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus. In particular, the degree to which size of a meal (caloric load) and varying nutrient composition may influence the incretin, insulin, and glucagon responses has not been well elucidated. Furthermore, little is known about postprandial glucagon responses, which might also be influenced by meal composition.

Our objective was to investigate the effects of 3 standardized meals with different caloric and nutritional content given in randomized order to subjects with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus in terms of glucose, insulin, glucagon, and incretin postprandial response and to evaluate the potential roles of those meals for enhancing incretin function in patients with diabetes and healthy individuals.

Section snippets

Study procedure

The study had a randomized, 3-period crossover design and included both subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 18) and healthy volunteers (n = 6). Subjects were randomized to 1 of 6 sequences (abc, acb, bac, bca, cab, or cba) of 3 meals to be administered as meal tolerance test. The 3 test meals included (a) a small (low-calorie) CH-rich meal, (b) a large (high-calorie) CH-rich meal, and (c) a (high-calorie) fat-rich meal. Meal compositions are shown in Table 1. Participants were

Study population

Characteristics of the study population are shown in Table 2. All patients with diabetes were treated with oral glucose-lowering medication: 7 patients used metformin, 8 used sulfonylureas, and 3 patients used both metformin and sulfonylureas. Antihypertensives were used by 11 diabetes patients and 1 healthy subject; lipid-lowering medication by 9 patients and 1 healthy individual.

Glucose, C-peptide, insulin, and glucagon responses

Postprandial profiles of all parameters are shown in Fig. 1. Fasting concentrations were not different before each

Discussion

In patients with diabetes and age- and BMI-matched healthy subjects, more CH or more fat in a meal led to a larger late insulin response than a small CH-rich meal. In healthy subjects, this led to a slight (not statistically significant) reduction in the hyperglycemic period as compared with the small CH-rich meal. In the diabetes patients, glycemic excursions were similar after the 3 meals, possibly because the β-cells still have some capacity to adjust their insulin production to control the

Conclusions

In conclusion, fat seems to stimulate GIP secretion, whereas CH in particular increases GLP-1 secretion. Both the large CH-rich meal and the fat-rich meal resulted in a larger insulin response as compared with the small CH-rich meal. Whereas this led to a slightly shorter period of hyperglycemia in healthy subjects, this was not the case for diabetes patients. Thus, differences in caloric load and meal composition led to differences in insulin and incretin responses but not to differences in

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Jannet Entius, Lida Ooteman, Marianne Veeken, and Jolanda Bosman for their excellent assistance in data collection and organization of the study.

References (34)

  • FriedewaldW.T. et al.

    Estimation of the concentration of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in plasma, without use of the preparative ultracentrifuge

    Clin Chem

    (1972)
  • KrarupT. et al.

    Diminished immunoreactive gastric inhibitory polypeptide response to a meal in newly diagnosed type I (insulin-dependent) diabetics

    J Clin Endocrinol Metab

    (1983)
  • OrskovC. et al.

    Tissue and plasma concentrations of amidated and glycine-extended glucagon-like peptide I in humans

    Diabetes

    (1994)
  • SeltzerH.S. et al.

    Insulin secretion in response to glycemic stimulus: relation of delayed initial release to carbohydrate intolerance in mild diabetes mellitus

    J Clin Invest

    (1967)
  • MatthewsJ.N. et al.

    Analysis of serial measurements in medical research

    BMJ

    (1990)
  • MariA. et al.

    Assessing insulin secretion by modeling in multiple-meal tests: role of potentiation

    Diabetes

    (2002)
  • MariA. et al.

    Meal and oral glucose tests for assessment of beta-cell function: modeling analysis in normal subjects

    Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab

    (2002)
  • Cited by (56)

    • Expression of sweet taste receptor and gut hormone secretion in modelled type 2 diabetes

      2017, General and Comparative Endocrinology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Plasma GLP-1 secretion was not reduced in type 2 diabetic rats. Although GLP-1 mimetics are widely used in the treatment of diabetes, data about GLP-1 secretion remained inconsistent, having been reported to be normal, decreased or increased in type 2 diabetes (Bagger et al., 2011; Bose et al., 2010; Brown et al., 2012; Jørgensen et al., 2012; Knop et al., 2007; Kozawa et al., 2010; Rijkelijkhuizen et al., 2010; Vollmer et al., 2008). The ZDF rat is a type 2 diabetic animal model with insulin resistance.

    • Early phase glucagon and insulin secretory abnormalities, but not incretin secretion, are similarly responsible for hyperglycemia after ingestion of nutrients

      2015, Journal of Diabetes and its Complications
      Citation Excerpt :

      We show in this study that impaired secretions of both insulin and glucagon in the early phase after ingestion of glucose or mixed meal play a similarly important role in post-challenge hyperglycemia of Japanese T2DM. Previous studies have demonstrated that secretions of glucagon and insulin as well as the incretins depend on meal size and composition in healthy subjects as well as in patients with diabetes (Alsalim, Omar, Pacini, et al., 2014; Kawai, Murayama, Okuda, et al., 1987; Rijkelijkhuizen, McQuarrie, Girman, et al., 2010). We used glucose and mixed meal of fixed size and composition in the current study; it would be interesting to see if there is any difference when meal size and composition is altered.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text