Endocrine activities of cortistatin-14 and its interaction with GHRH and ghrelin in humans.

Cortistatin (CST)-14, a neuropeptide with high homology with somatostatin (SS)-14, binds all sst subtypes but, unlike SS, also ghrelin's receptor. In six normal adults, we studied the effects of CST-14 or SS-14 administration (2.0 micro g/kg/h iv) on: 1) GH and insulin secretion; 2) the GH response to GHRH (1.0 microg/kg i.v.); and 3) the GH, prolactin (PRL), ACTH, cortisol, insulin, and glucose responses to ghrelin (1.0 microg/kg i.v.). CST-14 inhibited GH and insulin secretion (P < 0.01) to the same extent of SS-14. The GH response to GHRH was similarly inhibited (P < 0.01) by either CST-14 or SS-14. Ghrelin released more GH than GHRH (P < 0.01); these responses were similarly inhibited (P < 0.05) by either CST-14 or SS-14, that made ghrelin-induced GH rise similar to that after GHRH alone. Neither CST-14 nor SS-14 modified PRL, ACTH, or cortisol responses to ghrelin. The inhibitory effect of CST-14 and SS-14 on insulin was unaffected by ghrelin that, in turn, reduced insulin secretion per se (P < 0.01). Ghrelin increased glucose levels (P < 0.05); CST-14 and SS-14 did not modify this effect. Thus, CST-14 inhibits both basal and stimulated GH secretion in humans to the same extent of SS-14. The GH-releasing activity of ghrelin seems partially resistant to CST-14 as well as SS-14. CST-14 and SS-14 do not affect PRL and ACTH secretion but, like ghrelin, inhibit insulin secretion; the ghrelin-induced inhibition is not additive with that of CST-14 or SS-14, suggesting a common mechanism of action on beta cell secretion

Growth hormone (GH) rebound rise following somatostatin infusion withdrawal: studies in dogs with the use of GH-releasing hormone and a GH-releasing peptide

OBJECTIVE: Evidence has been presented that in both animals and humans the rebound secretion of growth hormone (GH) following withdrawal of an infusion of somatostatin (SS) is due to the functional activation of the hypothalamic GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) neurons of the recipient organism. Based on this premise, this study has sought to assess the existence of functional interactions between endogenous GHRH released by a SS infusion withdrawal (SSIW) and growth hormone-releasing peptides (GHRPs), a class of compounds allegedly acting via GHRH. METHODS: Five young dogs (3 to 4 years old, 2 male and 3 female) were administered, on different occasions, three consecutive intravenous boli of physiological saline (0.1 ml/kg), or GHRH (2 microg/kg), or EP92632 (125 microg/kg), a GHRP compound, or GHRH plus EP92632 at the end of three cycles of 1-h SS infusions (8 microg/(kg x h)) or during a 6-h infusion of saline. RESULTS: Under saline infusion (SALI), plasma GH levels were unaltered, whereas each SSIW cycle was followed by similar GH secretory episodes. Administration of the first GHRH bolus under SALI induced a rise in plasma GH concentrations slightly higher than that induced by the first cycle of SSIW, but the GH response to the second and third GHRH boli was similar to that after SSIW. Following SSIW, the response to the first bolus of GHRH was higher than that during SALI, but the second and third cycles of SSIW induced GH responses similar to those evoked by the GHRH bolus. During SALI, administration of the first bolus of EP92632 induced a rise in plasma GH which was higher than that induced by the first GHRH bolus, the second bolus elicited a GH peak of lesser amplitude and there was a partial restoration of the GH response to the third peptide bolus. SSIW strikingly enhanced the GH release to the first EP92632 bolus, a pattern also present, although to a lesser extent, with the second and third cycles of SSIW. Under SALI, combined administration of GHRH and EP92632 had a synergistic effect on GH release, but a progressive reduction was present in the GH response to the second and third GHRH plus EP92632 boli. SSIW increased only weakly the GH response to the first co-administration of the peptides over that present after administration of EP92632 alone, and did not induce a GH response higher than that present during SALI when the second bolus of the peptides was administered; after the third SSIW a GH rise higher than that present during SALI was elicited by the combined administration of the peptides. CONCLUSIONS: (i) the uniformity of the GH rebound responses to multiple cycles of SSIW may indicate that the latter activate a physiological mechanism which mimics that normally controlling GH pulse generation; (ii) EP92632 elicits, under our experimental conditions, a plasma GH rise higher than that induced by GHRH; (iii) SSIW enhances the GH response to EP92639 alone, to an extent reminiscent of that following combined administration of GHRH and EP92632. This pattern reinforces the view that SSIW elicits release of endogenous GHRH, and infers that the GHRP challenge after SSIW may be exploited in humans to distinguish between healthy and GH-deficient adults

Ghrelin plays a minor role in the physiological control of cardiac function in the rat

We have previously reported that a 7-d pretreatment with hexarelin, a synthetic ligand of the GH secretagogue receptor (GHS-R), largely prevented damages induced by ischemia and reperfusion in isolated rat hearts. Our aim was to ascertain whether ghrelin, an endogenous ligand of the GHS-R, is physiologically endowed with cardioprotective activity. Hypophysectomized rats were treated in vivo for 7 d with either ghrelin (320 microg/kg) or hexarelin (80 microg/kg), and their hearts were subjected in vitro to the ischemia and reperfusion procedure. Ghrelin was far less effective than hexarelin in preventing increases in left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (15% and 60% protection for ghrelin and hexarelin, respectively), coronary perfusion pressure (10% and 45% reduction), and release of creatine kinase in the heart perfusate (15% and 55% reduction). In the second experiment, normal rats were passively immunized against ghrelin for 21 d before the ischemia and reperfusion procedure. In these isolated hearts, the ischemia-reperfusion damage was not significantly increased compared with control rats. After hypophysectomy, CD36 mRNA levels significantly increased, whereas those of atrial natriuretic factor significantly decreased. We conclude that: 1) ghrelin plays a minor role in the control of heart function; and 2) hexarelin effects are mediated in part by the GHS-R and largely by interactions with the CD36