Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26359804›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2016

Species-specific action of (Pro3)GIP - a full agonist at human GIP receptors, but a partial agonist and competitive antagonist at rat and mouse GIP receptors.

A H Sparre-Ulrich, L S Hansen, B Svendsen, M Christensen, F K Knop, B Hartmann, J J Holst, M M Rosenkilde

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. GIP(3-30)NHDiabetologia · 2018
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Revitalizing GIP: Therapeutic Potential in Metabolic and Neurodegenerative Disorders.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Dual and Triple Incretin-Based Co-agonists: Novel Therapeutics for Obesity and Diabetes.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A H Sparre-UlrichDepartment of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The Panum Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
L S HansenDepartment of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The Panum Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
B SvendsenNNF Center for Basic Metabolic Research, Copenhagen, Denmark.
M ChristensenCenter for Diabetes Research, Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
F K KnopCenter for Diabetes Research, Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
B HartmannNNF Center for Basic Metabolic Research, Copenhagen, Denmark.
J J HolstNNF Center for Basic Metabolic Research, Copenhagen, Denmark.
M M RosenkildeDepartment of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The Panum Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DKGentofte Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeSpecific, high potency receptor antagonists are valuable tools when evaluating animal and human physiology. Within the glucose-dependent, insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) system, considerable attention has been given to the presumed GIP receptor antagonist, (Pro3)GIP, and its effect in murine studies. We conducted a pharmacological analysis of this ligand including interspecies differences between the rodent and human GIP system. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Transiently transfected COS-7 cells were assessed for cAMP accumulation upon ligand stimulation and assayed in competition binding using (125) I-human GIP. Using isolated perfused pancreata both from wild type and GIP receptor-deficient rodents, insulin-releasing, glucagon-releasing and somatostatin-releasing properties in response to species-specific GIP and (Pro3)GIP analogues were evaluated. KEY

resultsHuman (Pro3)GIP is a full agonist at human GIP receptors with similar efficacy (Emax ) for cAMP production as human GIP, while both rat and mouse(Pro3)GIP were partial agonists on their corresponding receptors. Rodent GIPs are more potent and efficacious at their receptors than human GIP. In perfused pancreata in the presence of 7 mM glucose, both rodent (Pro3)GIP analogues induced modest insulin, glucagon and somatostatin secretion, corresponding to the partial agonist activities observed in cAMP production. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: When evaluating new compounds, it is important to consider interspecies differences both at the receptor and ligand level. Thus, in rodent models, human GIP is a comparatively weak partial agonist. Human (Pro3)GIP was not an antagonist at human GIP receptors, so there is still a need for a potent antagonist in order to elucidate the physiology of human GIP.

Indexed as

Drug Partial AgonismAnimalsBinding, CompetitiveChlorocebus aethiopsCOS CellsCyclic AMPDose-Response Relationship, DrugGastric Inhibitory PolypeptideGlucagonHumansInsulinIodine RadioisotopesMaleMicePancreasRadioligand AssayCyclic AMPGastric Inhibitory Polypeptidegastric inhibitory polypeptide receptorGlucagonglucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, Pro(3)-InsulinIodine RadioisotopesReceptors, Gastrointestinal HormoneSomatostatin

Identifiers

PMID26359804
PMCPMC4737396
OpenAlexW2276372335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.