Search

Objective: Circulating ghrelin levels are increased by fasting and decreased by feeding, glucose load, insulin and somatostatin. Whether hyperglycaemia and insulin directly inhibit ghrelin secretion still remains matter of debate. The aim of the present study was therefore to investigate further the regulatory effects of glucose and insulin on ghrelin secretion., Design and Subjects: We studied the effects of glucose [oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) 100 g orally], insulin-induced hypoglycaemia [ITT, 0.1 IU/kg insulin intravenously (i.v.)], glucagon (1 mg i.v.), arginine (0.5 mg/kg i.v.) and saline on ghrelin, GH, insulin, glucose and glucagon levels in six normal subjects., Measurements: In all the sessions, blood samples were collected every 15 min from 0 up to + 120 min. Ghrelin, GH, insulin, glucagon and glucose levels were assayed at each time point., Results: OGTT increased (P < 0.01) glucose and insulin while decreasing (P < 0.01) GH and ghrelin levels. ITT increased (P < 0.01) GH but decreased (P < 0.01) ghrelin levels. Glucagon increased (P < 0.01) glucose and insulin without modifying GH and ghrelin. Arginine increased (P < 0.01) GH, insulin, glucagon and glucose (P < 0.05) but did not affect ghrelin secretion., Conclusions: Ghrelin secretion in humans is inhibited by OGTT-induced hyperglycaemia and ITT but not by glucagon and arginine, two substances able to increase insulin and glucose levels. These findings question the assumption that glucose and insulin directly regulate ghrelin secretion. On the other hand, ghrelin secretion is not associated with the GH response to ITT or arginine, indicating that the somatotroph response to these stimuli is unlikely to be mediated by ghrelin.

Objectives: Ghrelin is a 28-amino-acid peptide, predominantly produced by the stomach. It displays a strong GH-releasing activity mediated by the hypothalamus-pituitary GH secretagogue (GHS)-receptor (GHS-R). There are different studies that suggest the importance of ghrelin in feeding and weight homeostasis. In obesity there is a markedly decreased GH secretion. For both children and adults, the greater the body mass index (BMI), the lower the GH response to provocative stimuli, including the response to GHRH. However, the response to the natural GH secretaogogue ghrelin is unclear at the present time. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the GH response to ghrelin alone or combined with GHRH in a group of obese patients, in order to further understand the deranged GH secretory mechanisms in obesity and to clarify the mechanism of action of ghrelin., Patients and Measurements: Six obese female patients (31 +/- 3.4 years) with a BMI of 36.1 +/- 7.7 kg/m(2) were studied. As a control group, six normal nonobese female subjects of similar age and sex were studied. Four tests were performed: placebo, GHRH [1 micro g/kg, no more than 100 micro g, intravenous (i.v.)], ghrelin (1 micro g/kg, no more than 100 micro g, i.v.) and GHRH (1 micro g/kg, no more than 100 micro g, i.v.) plus ghrelin (1 micro g/kg, no more than 100 micro g, i.v.). Blood samples were taken at appropriate intervals for determination of GH. Statistical analyses were performed by Wilcoxon and by Mann-Whitney tests., Results: After GHRH, the median peak GH secretion in obese patients was 2.4 micro g/l (range 0.9-8.9 micro g/l). Ghrelin-induced GH secretion showed in obese patients a median peak of 24.4 micro g/l (range 7.4-85.0 micro g/l), significantly greater than the response after GHRH (P < 0.05). After the combined administration of GHRH plus ghrelin in obese patients the median peak GH secretion was 39.9 micro g/l (range 19.2-120.0 micro g/l), significantly greater than the response after GHRH (P < 0.05) or ghrelin (P < 0.05). GHRH-induced GH secretion in normal control subjects showed a median peak of 25.0 micro g/l (range 16.5-33.4 micro g/l). Ghrelin-induced GH secretion in normal showed a median peak of 68.5 micro g/l (range 22.5-119.5 micro g/l), significantly greater than the response after GHRH (P < 0.05). After the combined administration of GHRH plus ghrelin, in normal subjects the median peak GH secretion was 117.8 micro g/l (range 77.5-280.1 micro g/l), significantly greater than the response after GHRH or ghrelin alone (P < 0.05). When we compare the response of normal and obese patients, after GHRH alone, it was markedly decreased in obese people when compared with normal patients (P < 0.05) with a median GH peak of 25.0 micro g/l (range 16.5-33.4 micro g/l) and 2.4 micro g/l (range 0.9-8.9 micro g/l) for normal and obese patients, respectively. When we compare the response of normal and obese patients, after ghrelin alone or GHRH plus ghrelin, it was only blunted in obese subjects when compared with normal subjects with a median GH peak of 68.5 micro g/l (range 22.5-119.5 micro g/l) and 24.4 micro g/l (range 7.4-85 micro g/l) for normal and obese subjects, respectively, after ghrelin alone (P < 0.05) and a median GH peak of 117.8 micro g/l (range 77.5-280.1 micro g/l) and 39.9 micro g/l (range 19.2-120.0 micro g/l) for normal and obese patients, respectively, after GHRH plus ghrelin (P < 0.05)., Conclusions: This study has demonstrated a massive GH response to ghrelin alone or combined with GHRH in obese patients, suggesting that altered ghrelin secretion could play a major role in the blunted GH secretion present in obese patients.

Objective: Acylated ghrelin, a gastric peptide, possesses a potent GH- but also significant ACTH/cortisol-releasing activity mediated by the activation of GH secretagogue receptors (GHS-R) at the hypothalamus-pituitary level. The physiological role of ghrelin in the control of somatotroph and corticotroph function is, however, largely unclear. Glucagon is known to induce a clear increase of GH, ACTH and cortisol levels in humans, at least after intramuscular administration. In fact, glucagon is considered to be a classical alternative to insulin-induced hypoglycaemia (ITT) for the combined evaluation of the function of GH and the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. We aimed to clarify whether ghrelin mediate the GH and corticotroph responses to intramuscular glucagon or ITT, which has recently been reported able to induce a surprising ghrelin decrease., Subjects: To this aim we enrolled six normal young male subjects [age (mean +/- SD): 29.0 +/- 8.0 years, body mass index (BMI) 21.9 +/- 2.5 kg/m(2)]., Design and Measurements: In all the subjects we studied ghrelin, GH, ACTH, cortisol and glucose levels after glucagon (GLU; 0.017 mg/kg intramuscularly), ITT (0.1 IU/kg insulin intravenously) or saline administration., Results: Saline infusion was not followed by any significant variation in ghrelin, GH and glucose levels while ACTH and cortisol showed the expected spontaneous morning trend toward a decrease. GLU administration increased (P < 0.01) circulating GH, ACTH and cortisol as well as insulin and glucose levels. ITT induced an obvious increase (P < 0.01) of GH, ACTH and cortisol levels. The ITT-induced increases in GH and ACTH, but not cortisol, levels were higher (P < 0.01) than those after GLU. Circulating ghrelin levels were not modified by GLU. On the other hand, ghrelin levels underwent a transient reduction (P < 0.01) after insulin-induced hypoglycaemia., Conclusions: Ghrelin does not mediate the GH and ACTH responses to glucagon or to the ITT. In fact, ghrelin levels are not modified at all by glucagon and transiently decrease during the ITT. These findings support the assumption that ghrelin does not play a major role in the physiological control of somatotroph and corticotroph function.

Objective: Ghrelin is a 28 amino residue peptide produced predominantly by the stomach with substantially lower amounts deriving from other central and peripheral tissues. Ghrelin is a natural ligand of the GH secretagogue (GHS) receptor (GHS-R) and possesses a potent GH-releasing activity for which the acylation in serine 3 is essential. Ghrelin also possesses other endocrine and non-endocrine activities reflecting central and peripheral GHS-R distribution and stimulates PRL, ACTH and cortisol secretion, has been reported able to induce hyperglycaemia and to decrease insulin levels and has orexigenic activity. Moreover, ghrelin stimulates gastric motility and acid secretion and its action is mediated by acetylcholine which, in turn, is known to play a stimulatory influence on GH, ACTH and insulin secretion., Subjects and Methods: In order to clarify the influence, if any, of acetylcholine on the endocrine activities of ghrelin, we studied the effects of cholinergic enhancement by pyridostigmine (PD, 120 mg p.o. at -60 minutes) and blockade by pirenzepine (PIR, 100 mg p.o. at -60 minutes) on GH, PRL, cortisol, insulin and glucose responses to human acylated ghrelin (1.0 microg/kg i.v. at 0 minutes) in seven normal young volunteers [age (mean +/- SEM): 28.3 +/- 3.1 years; BMI: 21.9 +/- 0.9 kg/m2]. In the same subjects, the effects of PD and PIR on the GH response to GHRH (1.0 microg/kg i.v. at 0 minutes) have also been studied., Results: The administration of ghrelin induced a prompt increase in circulating GH levels (hAUC: 5452.4 +/- 904.9 microg*min/L) which was markedly higher (P < 0.01) than that elicited by GHRH (966.9 +/- 20.50 microg*min/L). Ghrelin also induced a significant increase in PRL (1273.5 +/- 199.7 microg*min/L) and cortisol levels (15505.1 +/- 796.3 microg*min/L) and a decrease in insulin levels (Delta hAUC: -198.1 +/- 39.2 mU*min/L) which was preceded by an increase in plasma glucose levels (8743.8 +/- 593.0 mg*min/dL). The GH response to GHRH was markedly potentiated by PD (4363.3 +/- 917.3 microg*min/L; P < 0.01 vs. GHRH alone). In turn, PD did not modify either the GH response to ghrelin (6564.2 +/- 1753.5 microg*min/L) or its stimulatory effect on PRL and cortisol as well as its effects on insulin and glucose levels. The GH response to GHRH was inhibited by PIR (171.5 +/- 34.7 microg*min/L, P < 0.01 vs. GHRH alone) which, in turn, did not significantly modify the GH response to ghrelin (4044.0 +/- 948.8 microg*min/L). PIR also did not modify the effects of ghrelin on PRL, cortisol, insulin and glucose levels., Conclusions: The endocrine activities of ghrelin are not affected significantly by cholinergic enhancement and muscarinic blockade. Thus, acetylcholine does not play a major role in the endocrine actions of ghrelin. Moreover, as the cholinergic system influences GH secretion via modulation of somatostatin release, the present data agree with the assumption that ghrelin is partially refractory to the influence of somatostatin.

Objective: Ghrelin, a 28 amino acid peptide purified from the stomach and showing a unique structure with an n-octanoyl ester in serine-3 residue, is a natural ligand of the GH secretagogue (GHS) receptor (GHS-R) and strongly stimulates GH secretion. In humans, ghrelin is more potent than growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) and non-natural GHS such as hexarelin. Moreover, ghrelin shows a true synergism with GHRH, has no interaction with hexarelin and, similarly to non-natural GHS, is partially refractory to the inhibitory effect of exogenous somatostatin (SS). Despite this evidence, the mechanisms underlying the GH-releasing effect of ghrelin in humans have not been fully clarified., Subjects: To this aim we enrolled six normal young volunteers [age (mean +/- SEM) 28.9 +/- 3.1 year; body mass index 22.3 +/- 1.0 kg/m2)., Design and Measurements: In all subjects we studied the effects of glucose (OGTT, 100 g oral glucose at -45 min) or free fatty acids (FFA) load [lipid-heparin emulsion, Li-He, Intralipid 10% 250 ml + heparin 2500 U i.v. from -30 to +120 min] as well as of arginine (ARG, 0.5 g/kg infused from 0 to +30 min) on the GH response to human ghrelin (1.0 micro g/kg i.v. at 0 min) administration. These results were compared with those obtained by studying the effects of OGTT, Li-He and ARG on the GH response to GHRH-29 (1.0 micro g/kg i.v. at 0 min)., Results: The GH response to ghrelin (auc 5452.4 +/- 991.3 micro g/l/h) was higher (P < 0.05) than that after GHRH (1519.4 +/- 93.3 micro g/l/h). The GH response to GHRH was inhibited by OGTT (450.7 +/- 81.1 micro g/l/h, P < 0.05) and almost abolished by Li-He (230.0 +/- 63.6 micro g/l/h, P < 0.05) while was markedly potentiated by ARG (2520.4 +/- 425.8 micro g/l/h, P < 0.05). The GH response to GHRH + ARG, however, was lower (P < 0.05) than that to ghrelin alone. The GH response to ghrelin was blunted by OGTT (2153.1 +/- 781.9 micro g/l/h, P < 0.05) as well as by Li-He (3158.8 +/- 426.7 micro g/l/h, P < 0.05) but these responses remained higher (P < 0.05) than that to GHRH alone. On the other hand, ARG did not modify the GH response to ghrelin (6324.3 +/- 1275.5 micro g/l/h). For GH 1 micro g/l = 2 mU/l., Conclusions: In humans, ghrelin exerts a strong stimulatory effect on GH secretion which is partially refractory to the inhibitory effect of both glucose and FFA load and is not enhanced by ARG. These factors almost abolish and potentiate, respectively, the GH response to GHRH, at least partially, via modulation of hypothalamic SS release. Thus, our findings agree with the hypothesis that ghrelin as well as non-natural GHS acts, at least partially, by antagonizing SS activity.

Objective: Ghrelin, a 28 amino acid acylated peptide, is a natural ligand of the GH secretagogues (GHS) receptor (GHS-R), which is specific for synthetic GHS. Similar to synthetic GHS, ghrelin strongly stimulates GH secretion but also displays significant stimulatory effects on lactotroph and corticotroph secretion. It has been hypothesized that isolated GH deficiency (GHD) could reflect hypothalamic impairment that would theoretically involve defect in ghrelin activity., Patients: In the present study, we verified the effects of ghrelin (1 microg/kg i.v.) on GH, PRL, ACTH and cortisol levels in adult patients with isolated severe GHD [five males and one female, age (mean +/- SEM) 24.7 +/- 2.6 years, BMI 25.7 +/- 2.7 kg/m2]. In all patients, the GH response to insulin-induced hypoglycaemia (ITT, 0.1 IU regular insulin i.v.) and GH releasing hormone (GHRH) (1 microg/kg i.v.) + arginine (ARG, 0.5 g/kg i.v.) was also studied. The hormonal responses in GHD were compared with those in age-matched normal subjects (NS, seven males, age 28.6 +/- 2.9 years, BMI 22.1 +/- 0.8 kg/m2)., Results: IGF-I levels in GHD were markedly lower than in NS (69.8 +/- 11.3 vs. 167.9 +/- 19.2 microg/l, P < 0.003). Ghrelin administration induced significant increase in GH, PRL, ACTH and cortisol levels in all GHD. In GHD, the GH response to ghrelin was higher (P < 0.05) than that to GHRH + ARG, which, in turn, was higher (P < 0.05) than that to ITT (9.2 +/- 4.1 vs. 5.3 +/- 1.7 vs. 1.4 +/- 0.4 microg/l). These GH (1 microg/l = 2 mU/l) responses in GHD were markedly lower (P < 0.0001) than those in NS (ghrelin vs. GHRH + ARG vs. ITT 92.1 +/- 16.7 vs. 65.3 +/- 8.9 vs. 17.7 +/- 3.5 microg/l). In GHD, the highest individual peak GH response to ghrelin was markedly lower than the lowest peak GH response in NS (28.5 vs. 42.9 microg/l). GHD and NS showed overlapping PRL (1 microg/l = 32 mU/l) (10.0 +/- 1.4 vs. 14.9 +/- 2.2 microg/l), ACTH (22.3 +/- 5.3 vs. 18.7 +/- 4.6 pmol/l) and cortisol responses (598.1 +/- 52.4 vs. 486.9 +/- 38.9 nmol/l)., Conclusions: This study shows that ghrelin is one of the most powerful provocative stimuli of GH secretion, even in those patients with isolated severe GHD. In this condition, however, the somatotroph response is markedly reduced while the lactotroph and corticotroph responsiveness to ghrelin is fully preserved, indicating that this endocrine activity is fully independent of mechanisms underlying the GH-releasing effect. These results do not support the hypothesis that ghrelin deficiency is a major cause of isolated GH deficiency but suggest that ghrelin might represent a reliable provocative test to evaluate the maximal GH secretory capacity provided that appropriate cut-off limits are assumed.

Objective: Ghrelin, a 28-amino-acid peptide purified from the stomach and showing a unique structure with an n-octanoyl ester at the serine 3 residue, is a natural ligand of the GH secretagogue (GHS) receptor (GHS-R). Ghrelin strongly stimulates GH secretion in both animals and humans, showing a synergistic effect with GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) but no interaction with synthetic GHS. However, the activity of ghrelin as well as that of non-natural GHS is not fully specific for GH; ghrelin also induces a stimulatory effect on lactotroph and corticotroph secretion, at least in humans., Design: To further clarify the mechanisms underlying the GH-releasing activity of this natural GHS, we studied the effects of somatostatin (SS, 2.0 microg/kg/h from -30 to +90 min) on the endocrine responses to ghrelin (1.0 microg/kg i.v. at 0 min) in seven normal young male volunteers [age (mean +/- SEM) 28.6 +/- 2.9 years; body mass index (BMI) 22.1 +/- 0.8 kg/m2]. In the same subjects, the effect of SS on the GH response to GHRH (1.0 microm/kg i.v. at 0 min) was also studied., Measurements: Blood samples were taken every 15 min from -30 up to +120 min. GH levels were assayed at each time point in all sessions; PRL, ACTH and cortisol levels were assayed after ghrelin administration alone and during SS infusion., Results: The GH response to ghrelin (hAUC0'-->120' 2695.0 +/- 492.6 microg min/l) was higher (P < 0.01) than that after GHRH (757.1 +/- 44.1 microg min/l). SS infusion almost abolished the GH response to GHRH (177.0 +/- 37.7 microg min/l, P < 0.01); the GH response to ghrelin was inhibited by SS (993.8 +/- 248.5 microg min/l, P < 0.01) but GH levels remained higher (P < 0.05) than with GHRH. Ghrelin induced significant increases in PRL, ACTH and cortisol levels and these responses were not modified by SS., Conclusions: Ghrelin, a natural GHS-R ligand, exerts a strong stimulatory effect on GH secretion in humans and this effect is only blunted by an exogenous somatostatin dose which almost abolishes the GH response to GHRH. The stimulatory effect of ghrelin on lactotroph and corticotroph secretion is refractory to exogenous somatostatin, indicating that these effects occur through pathways independent of somatostatinergic influence.

Background: The activity of the GH/IGF-I axis, known to play a major role in myocardial structure and function, has been reported to be altered in patients with chronic heart failure., Aim and Design of the Study: In order to evaluate the possibility that clinically used cardioactive drugs may exert neuroendocrine influences on somatotroph secretion, we studied the effects of pretreatment with enalapril (20 mg/day orally for 3 days), furosemide (20 mg i.v. as a bolus at -5 minutes) or digoxin (0.25 mg orally 4x/day for 3 days) on the GH response to growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) (1.0 microg/ kg i.v. as a bolus at 0 minutes) in 12 healthy male adults (age [mean +/- SEM] 30.2 +/- 1.4 years; BMI 22.7 +/- 0.7 kg/ m2). In a subgroup of 8 subjects the same study was performed testing the GH response to GHRH + arginine (ARG; 0.5 g/kg i.v. from 0 to + 30 minutes). RESULTS The GH response to GHRH (1,304.1 +/- 248-5 microg/l/h) was not modified by enalapril (1,368.7 +/- 171.2 microg/l/h) or by furosemide (1,269.3 +/- 185.2 microg/l/h) but was significantly blunted by digoxin (613.6 +/- 73.2 microg/l/h, P < 0.05). On the other hand digoxin, enalapril and furosemide did not modify the GH response to GHRH +ARG., Conclusions: Digoxin, but not enalapril or furosemide, inhibits the GH response to GHRH in normal subjects. The blunting effect of digoxin on the GHRH-induced GH response is counteracted by arginine. These findings show that digoxin possesses an inhibitory effect on somatotroph secretion that may be mediated at the hypothalamic level.

Objective: Hyperactivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in ageing has been reported both in humans and in animals and may be involved in age-related changes in body composition, structure functions and metabolism, as well as in brain ageing. Despite the supposed HPA hyperactivity and its refractoriness to negative glucocorticoid feedback, low levels of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and its sulphate have been clearly demonstrated in human ageing and may suggest another cause of age-related changes in structure function and metabolism. Thus, our aim was to verify the adrenal responsiveness to various ACTH doses in normal elderly subjects., Design: We studied cortisol (F), aldosterone (A) and DHEA responses to the sequential administration of very low, low and supramaximal ACTH1-24 doses (0.06 microg or 0.5 microg followed by 250 microg ACTH1-24 i.v. at 0 and +60 minutes) in healthy elderly subjects (ES) [six females and two males, aged 63-75 years, body mass index (BMI) 22-26 kg/m2]. The results in ES were compared with those recorded in healthy young subjects (YS) (six females and six males, aged 22-34 years, BMI 20-25 kg/m2)., Results: Basal DHEA levels in ES were lower (P < 0.05) than in YS, while F and A levels were similar in both groups. DHEA, F and A responses to ACTH were dose-dependent in both groups. In ES, however, DHEA levels showed no response to the 0.06 microg dose, a modest increase after 0.5 microg and a clearer rise after 250 microg ACTH; at any dose, the DHEA response in ES was clearly lower than in YS (P < 0.04). The F responses to 0.5 microg and 250 microg ACTH in ES were similar to those in YS; whereas, in ES, 0.06 microg ACTH elicited a non significant F increase which was significantly lower than in YS (P < 0.05). Similarly, the A responses to the highest ACTH doses were similar in both groups but, in ES, 0.06 microg ACTH elicited no increase in A secretion, which was clearly lower than in YS (P < 0.03)., Conclusions: Normal elderly subjects show severe reduction of DHEA response to a wide range of ACTH doses, in agreement with peculiar impairment of the activity of the adrenal reticularis zone in ageing. In contrast to young adults, elderly subjects also show no cortisol and aldosterone response to a very low ACTH dose. This evidence indicates a reduced sensitivity to ACTH in the fasciculata and glomerulosa zones of the adrenal gland in ageing.

Objective: There is evidence showing that GH and IGF-I have specific receptors in the heart and that these hormones are able to promote cardiac remodelling and inotropism. It has been reported that patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) benefit from treatment with rhGH showing a striking increase in cardiac contractility. However, until now, the activity of GH/IGF-I axis in DCM has never been clearly assessed., Patients: To clarify this point, we enrolled 39 patients with idiopathic or post-ischaemic DCM (36 M/3 F; age (mean +/- S.D.) 55.3 +/- 9.0 years; BMI: 25.3 +/- 3.2 kg/m2; New York Heart Association class (NYHA) I/2, II/19, III/15, IV/3) and 42 age-matched controls (CS, 38 M/4 F; age 56.0 +/- 7.8 years; BMI: 24.9 +/- 1.5 kg/m2). DCM patients were characterized by a left-ventricular diastolic diameter of 73.8 +/- 8.3 mm, a shortening fraction of 15.9 +/- 6.4% and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 25.1 +/- 8.7%. In all subjects clinical and biochemical indices of renal and hepatic function as well as nutritional parameters were in the normal range., Measurements: In both groups we studied: a) IGF-I levels in basal conditions and after administration of low rhGH doses for 4 days (5.0 or 10.0 mu/kg/day x 4 days); b) the acute GH-response to GHRH (1.0 mu/kg i.v.) or hexarelin (HEX, 2.0 mu/kg i.v.), a peptidyl GH secretagogue (GHRP); c) mean GH concentration (mGHc) over 10 h sampling (every 20 min) from 2200 h to 0800 h., Results: Basal IGF-I levels in DCM were lower (P = 0.000039) than in CS (135.2 +/- 46.8 vs. 193.7 +/- 63.7 mu/l), whereas, basal IGFBP-3 and GHBP2 levels in DCM and CS were similar (2.5 +/- 1.3 vs. 2.6 +/- 0.5 mg/l and 25.3 +/- 3.6 vs. 28.3 +/- 5.0%; P = 0.95 and P = 0.085, respectively). After 4 days of 5.0 mu/kg/day rhGH administration, IGF-I levels in DCM (215.4 +/- 82.0 mu/l; P = 0.0023 vs. baseline) remained lower (P = 0.027) than those in CS (280.0 +/- 80.7 mu/l; P = 0.000080 vs. baseline). After 10.0 mu/kg/day for 4 days, IGF-I levels in DCM (297.2 +/- 109.2 mu/l; P = 0.0033 vs. baseline) were similar (P = 0.76) to those in CS (310.9 +/- 81.7 mu/l; P = 0.000060 vs. baseline). The GH response to GHRH in DCM was lower (P = 0.0022) than that in CS (hAUC0-120: 192.0 +/- 177.3 vs. 345.3 +/- 191.1 mu/l/h) whereas that to HEX in DCM and CS was similar (611.0 +/- 437.5 vs. 535.4 +/- 302.8 mu/l/h; P = 0.95). Within the DCM group, basal and rhGH-stimulated IGF-levels as wel as the GH response to GHRH or HEX were not different among NYHA classes and did not show any correlation with ECHO parameters. The mGHc in DCM (1.0 +/- 0.5 mu/l) was similar (P = 0.57) to that in CS (0.9 = 0.7 mu/l)., Conclusions: Our present data demonstrate that in dilated cardiomyopathy patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction basal IGF-I levels are reduced whereas the IGF-I response to low rhGH doses is preserved. These findings suggest a normal peripheral GH sensitivity in dilated cardiomyopathy. On the other hand, though nocturnal mean GH concentration in dilated cardiomyopathy patients is similar to that in normal subjects, the somatotroph responsiveness to GHRH, but not that to hexarelin, is reduced. Thus, subtle alterations in the activity of GH/IGF-I axis are present in dilated cardiomyopathy.

Objectives: The activity of the GH/IGF-I axis varies during life and is clearly reduced in the elderly. In fact, GH, IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels in older people are clearly reduced and similar to those observed in patients with GH deficiency. The declining activity of the GH/IGF-I axis with advancing age may contribute to changes in body composition, structure, function and metabolism. In fact, treatment with pharmacological doses of rhGH restored plasma IGF-I levels, increased lean body mass and muscle strength while decreased adipose tissue mass in healthy elderly subjects. At present it is unclear whether peripheral GH sensitivity is preserved in aging. To clarify this point, we aimed to verify the effect of both single dose and short term treatment with very low rhGH doses on the IGF-I levels in normal elderly subjects. Normal young adults were studied as controls., Design: We studied the IGF-I response to rhGH administration after single (20 micrograms/kg s.c.) or repeated administrations (5 micrograms/kg s.c. for 4 days) in two groups of young and elderly subjects., Subjects: Twenty-seven healthy elderly (ES, 14 F and 13 M, age mean +/- SEM: 69.4 +/- 1.3 years, BMI: 23.9 +/- 0.5 kg/m2) and 21 young adult subjects (YS, 12 F and 9 M, 29.8 +/- 1.2 years, 23.8 +/- 0.5 kg/m2) were studied, divided into two groups., Measurements: Group 1: blood samples for IGF-I and IGFBP-3 assay were drawn basally and 12 h after rhGH administration (20 micrograms/kg). Group 2: blood samples for IGF-I, IGFBP-3, glucose and insulin assays were drawn basally, 12 h after the first and the last rhGH administration (5 micrograms/kg). Free T3 (fT3), free T4 (fT4) and TSH levels were also assayed basally and after the last rhGH administration; oestradiol and testosterone levels were measured basally., Results: Basal IGF-I levels were lower in ES (whole group) than in YS (whole group) (123.1 +/- 8.9 vs. 230.4 +/- 16.1 micrograms/l, P < 0.001) while IGFBP-3 levels in the two groups were similar (2.7 +/- 0.2 vs. 3.1 +/- 0.2 mg/l). No sex-related differences in IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels were recorded in either group. Group 1: the single administration of 20 micrograms/kg rhGH induced a significant (P < 0.001) IGF-I rise both in YS (318.0 +/- 25.3 vs. 256.0 +/- 21.6 micrograms/l) and ES (187.2 +/- 16.8 vs. 100.4 +/- 9.5 micrograms/l). IGF-I levels after rhGH in ES persisted lower than those in YS (P < 0.001), but the percentage IGF-I increase after rhGH was higher (P < 0.001) in ES (91.6 +/- 12.9%) than in YS (23.9 +/- 5.0%) subjects. Both in YS and ES IGFBP-3 levels were significantly increased to the same extent by 20 micrograms/kg rhGH (3.0 +/- 0.2 vs. 2.3 +/- 0.2 mg/l; 2.9 +/- 0.2 vs. 2.6 +/- 0.2 mg/l, P < 0.001 vs. baseline). Group 2: basal glucose, insulin, fT3, fT4 and TSH levels in YS and ES were similar; testosterone levels in aged and young men were similar while oestradiol levels in aged women were lower (P < 0.01) than in the young ones. IGF-I levels were significantly increased 12 h after the first administration of 5 micrograms/kg rhGH both in ES (166.6 +/- 15.7 vs. 138.3 +/- 12.1 micrograms/l, P < 0.03) and YS (272.2 +/- 16.1 vs. 230.4 +/- 16.1 micrograms/l, P < 0.001). Twelve hours after the last rhGH administration IGF-I levels were further increased (P < 0.001) both in ES (208.7 +/- 21.1 micrograms/l) and YS (301.7 +/- 17.6 micrograms/l). IGF-I levels in ES persisted lower than those in YS at each time point (P < 0.001); however, the percentage IGF-I increase after rhGH in ES and YS was similar (after the first administration: 22.4 +/- 5.1 vs. 21.7 +/- 5.1%; after the last administration: 52.9 +/- 9.5 vs. 39.5 +/- 9.9%). No significant variation in IGFBP-3, glucose, insulin, fT3, fT4 or TSH levels was recorded in either ES or YS., Conclusions: Our data demonstrate that IGF-I levels in aging are reduced but the peripheral sensitivity to rhGH is preserved. In fact, in aged subjects the percentage rhGH-induced IGF-I increase is similar or even highe