Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Section V: The Incretin Pathway

Gastric Inhibitory Polypeptide and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 in the Pathogenesis of Type 2 Diabetes

  1. Michael A. Nauck1,
  2. Birgit Baller2 and
  3. Juris J. Meier23
  1. 1From the Diabeteszentrum Bad Lauterberg, Bad Lauterberg, Germany
  2. 2Medizinische Universitätsklinik I, St. Josef-Hospital, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany
  3. 3Larry L. Hillblom Islet Research Center, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
  1. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Prof. Dr. med. Michael Nauck, Diabeteszentrum Bad Lauterberg, Kirchberg 21, D-37431 Bad Lauterberg im Harz. E-mail: m.nauck{at}diabeteszentrum.de
Diabetes 2004 Dec; 53(suppl 3): S190-S196. https://doi.org/10.2337/diabetes.53.suppl_3.S190
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The incretin effect denominates the phenomenon that oral glucose elicits a higher insulin response than does intravenous glucose. The two hormones responsible for the incretin effect, glucose-dependent insulinotropic hormone (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), are secreted after oral glucose loads and augment insulin secretion in response to hyperglycemia. In patients with type 2 diabetes, the incretin effect is reduced, and there is a moderate degree of GLP-1 hyposecretion. However, the insulinotropic response to GLP-1 is well maintained in type 2 diabetes. GIP is secreted normally or hypersecreted in type 2 diabetes; however, the responsiveness of the endocrine pancreas to GIP is greatly reduced. In ∼50% of first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes, similarly reduced insulinotropic responses toward exogenous GIP can be observed, without significantly changed secretion of GIP or GLP-1 after oral glucose. This opens the possibility that a reduced responsiveness to GIP is an early step in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes. On the other hand, this provides a basis to use incretin hormones, especially GLP-1 and its derivatives, to replace a deficiency in incretin-mediated insulin secretion in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

  • DPP4, dipeptidyl peptidase 4
  • GIP, glucose-dependent insulinotropic hormone
  • GLP-1, glucagon-like peptide-1

INCRETIN HORMONES

The study of gut hormones as stimulators of secretion of the endocrine pancreas has a long history, probably starting with attempts to therapeutically administer intestinal mucosal extracts (containing putative insulinotropic hormones) in patients with diabetes (1). Due to improvements in methods to quantify plasma concentrations of potential incretins (2,3) and in the ability to estimate insulin secretion in vivo (4–6), a clear picture of the true physiological importance of the major incretin hormones, gastric inhibitory polypeptide, also interpreted as glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), has emerged (7–11). From the beginning (1), the study of intestinal incretin hormones has been driven by the hope to better understand the pathogenesis of diabetes, especially that of type 2 diabetes, or to find new treatments based on properties of gut-derived insulinotropic agents. While the latter has been the object of several comprehensive reviews in recent years (9,12,13), the former will be the topic of the present article.

QUANTIFICATION OF THE INCRETIN EFFECT

The incretin effect is a phenomenon in which oral glucose (or any other way for the administration of glucose to not bypass its absorption from the gut) elicits a much higher insulin secretory response than an intravenous infusion of glucose with similar glycemic rises (14,15) or if the same amount of glucose was given by both routes (16). In the latter case, glucose concentrations were much higher with intravenous rather than oral glucose administration (16). State of the art for exactly quantifying the incretin effect is a comparison of the insulin secretory response after oral and “isoglycemic” intravenous glucose (i.e., an infusion leading to a similar glycemic profile as after oral glucose). It has been noted that the contribution of the incretin effect to insulin responses after oral glucose is greater than that based on the measurement of C-peptide concentrations or insulin secretion rates derived thereof by deconvolution techniques (14,15). This difference points to additional changes in insulin clearance (first-pass hepatic elimination), which are greater after oral than intravenous glucose (14,17).

The quantitative impact of the incretin effect depends on the size of the glucose load and ranges between 20 and 60% of the total insulin secretory response in healthy subjects (14–16,18).

In patients with type 2 diabetes, a reduced or absent incretin effect has been described (14). This finding prompted examinations into the secretion and insulinotropic action of incretin hormones in patients with type 2 diabetes, in their first-degree relatives (a high-risk group for developing diabetes later in life) (19), and in subjects with impaired oral glucose tolerance (who are also at high risk) (20,21). In first-degree relatives, no quantitative difference in the incretin effect was found (62 ± 5% vs. 64 ± 6% contribution to C-peptide responses after 75 g oral glucose) (22). The incretin effect in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance has not been reported but appears to be reduced to a much lesser degree (if at all) than in patients with type 2 diabetes. These observations, however, were based on a small number of subjects (M.A.N., W. Creutzfeldt, unpublished observations).

GLP-1 SECRETION

Plasma GLP-1 concentrations rise after meals or oral glucose, sucrose, or fat loads (2,23–25). Typical basal (fasting) concentrations are ∼5 pmol/l, and peak concentrations of ∼15–40 pmol/l are observed 1 h after nutrient ingestion. These numbers refer to the total amount of GLP-1 that has been secreted, including intact (biologically active) GLP-1 (7-36 amide or 7-37) and the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4)-degraded form (9-36 amide or 9-37), which is devoid of insulinotropic activity (26–29).

In type 2 diabetic patients, contradicting information has been published regarding the secretion of GLP-1 in response to oral glucose. Both elevated and reduced postchallenge responses have been described in earlier studies (30,31). In recent years, larger cohorts have been studied with more elaborate methods. Uniformly, a slight reduction in GLP-1 response has been found in comparison to nondiabetic subjects, especially during the second hour after the nutrient stimulus (32,33). Vilsbøll et al. (32) also examined the plasma concentrations of intact, biologically active GLP-1 and confirmed a reduced response in patients with type 2 diabetes. The percent contribution of intact GLP-1 relative to total GLP-1 was similar in patients with type 2 diabetes and healthy control subjects. In line with this observation, DPP4 activity in plasma has not been found to be different between patients with type 2 diabetes and healthy control subjects.

Toft-Nielsen et al. (33) also described a slightly reduced GLP-1 secretion in obese subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. Although ATP-dependent K+ channels have been described in GLP-1–producing L-cells (34), there is no clear influence of sulfonylurea pretreatment on GLP-1 secretion. It is not known whether improving metabolic control would normalize GLP-1 responses to nutrient ingestion (e.g., whether the GLP-1 secretion abnormality is a primary or secondary phenomenon).

In first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes, GLP-1 secretion after oral glucose (22) and meals (35) was unchanged relative to healthy control subjects.

The question arises whether small differences (by ∼5 pmol/l) (32,33) in the late phase of nutrient-induced GLP-1 secretion are of sufficient importance to have consequences for glucose metabolism. The answer probably is not because of multiple reasons. First, even in healthy subjects, antagonizing the action of exogenous GLP-1 (0.3 pmol · kg−1 · min−1, leading to increments in plasma GLP-1 concentrations of ∼12 pmol/l) by using exendin (9-39), a GLP-1 receptor antagonist (36,37), had only minor effects on insulin levels. Second, using the same antagonist to block GLP-1 actions after a liquid mixed meal enhanced rather than reduced insulin responses (38). The GLP-1 increment induced by the meal was ∼30 pmol/l in this study. The paradoxical rise in insulin is most likely explained by an acceleration in gastric emptying prompted by the GLP-1 antagonist (9). Third, the effect of infusing GLP-1 at a dose of 0.5 pmol · kg−1 · min−1, leading to increments in plasma GLP-1 concentrations of ∼25–40 pmol/l, on both glucose profiles and insulin secretion were minor in patients with type 2 diabetes (39).

Based on these studies, a minor reduction in GLP-1 secretion as demonstrated in patients with type 2 diabetes cannot be expected to have a significant impact on insulin secretion and glucose metabolism.

INSULINOTROPIC (AND OTHER) GLP-1 ACTIONS

Soon after the discovery of GLP-1, it became clear that GLP-1 is active in patients with type 2 diabetes, in contrast to the insulinotropic action of GIP, which is clearly reduced or even lost (31), and that the activity of GLP-1 infused at pharmacological concentrations would be sufficient to fully normalize fasting (40–45) and postprandial (42,46) glucose concentrations. Notably, in patients with type 2 diabetes in good metabolic control on treatment with diet/exercise with or without oral antidiabetic drugs, there was no significant difference in the insulin secretory response to glucose clamped at 8.5 mmol/l in comparison to age- and weight-matched healthy subjects (31). However, in other cohorts, the insulinotropic response to GLP-1 was somewhat impaired in patients with type 2 diabetes (39), and with higher fasting glucose concentrations, the responsiveness to GLP-1 is clearly reduced (33).

In contrast to GLP-1 actions at pharmacological plasma concentrations (such as seen during the infusion of 1.2 pmol · kg−1 · min−1) (31,40), significant insulinotropic responses at doses mimicking a physiological “replacement” of postprandial GLP-1 increments have failed to significantly stimulate insulin secretion in patients with type 2 diabetes in some (31) but not in all (47) studies. This adds further evidence against the small differences in GLP-1 secretion typical for patients with type 2 diabetes being of pathophysiological importance.

GLP-1 is fully effective in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (45,48). GLP-1 effects in first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes have not been studied.

GIP SECRETION

The secretion of GIP in response to oral glucose or mixed meals has been examined in numerous studies. Using different radioimmunological methods, most studies agree that GIP responses, on average, are higher in patients with type 2 diabetes than in healthy control subjects (49–53). Creutzfeldt et al. (52) suggested a bimodal distribution with GIP hypo- as well as hyper-secretors among 141 type 2 diabetic patients studied. The overall differences between diabetic and healthy subjects, however, were minor on average, and other studies have not detected significant differences between healthy controls and type 2 diabetic patients (32,33). In subjects with impaired oral glucose tolerance, GIP responses appear to be normal (33). In first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes studied during a 24-h period with regular meals, the GIP response after breakfast and lunch was significantly greater than in control subjects without diabetic relatives. The 24-h integrated incremental GIP response was also significantly greater (35). In our own study of first-degree relatives, no significant difference (but a similar trend) was detected (22).

INSULINOTROPIC GIP ACTIONS

Earlier studies used GIP of the porcine sequence and glycemic conditions that were less controlled than during a hyperglycemic clamp. The amino acid sequence difference between porcine and human GIP caused differential affinity to GIP antisera, and thus it was difficult to exactly compare plasma concentrations of endogenous (human) GIP and infused (porcine) GIP (54,55). Nevertheless, all studies found only minor insulinotropic effects of exogenous GIP in patients with type 2 diabetes (31,56–61) (Table 1). If a healthy control group was compared under similar glycemic conditions, insulin secretory responses to exogenous GIP were shown to be greatly reduced in patients with type 2 diabetes (31,59,60), even when extremely high doses of GIP leading to far supraphysiological plasma concentrations were used (61). GIP at a dose leading to a “physiological replacement” of postprandial plasma concentrations (0.8 pmol · kg−1 · min−1) was without significant effect on parameters of insulin secretion (31).

Taken together, these studies suggest that a major abnormality of the entero-insular axis in patients with type 2 diabetes is reduced insulinotropic activity of GIP. Given the importance of GIP as a physiological incretin hormone, this reduced responsiveness may well explain the reduced incretin effect typical for type 2 diabetes (14) and could contribute to the abnormalities of insulin secretion associated with this condition (6,62). Based on the observation that also in a significant proportion (∼50%) of nondiabetic first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes a reduced GIP effect can be observed (60), it has been postulated that reduced expression of β-cell GIP receptors is an early, potentially genetically determined step in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes (63). Indeed, in an animal model of type 2 diabetes, reduced number and activity of GIP receptors have been described (64). It is, however, not known at what stage in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes such a deficient signaling via GIP receptors occurs, and if it can be quantitatively modified by glycemic control, nutrition, or other environmental factors. It remains a challenge to explain why insulinotropic actions of GLP-1 (31,39,41) or its derivatives (65) are relatively well preserved in patients with type 2 diabetes, while GIP effects are greatly abnormal. This is the more surprising since GIP and GLP-1 share many common features in their mode of action, involving the majority of mechanisms of postreceptor signaling (11,66–68), primarily via cAMP and protein kinase A. Recent studies by Vilsbøll et al. (61) make it unlikely that the GIP receptors of pancreatic β-cells would be defective in patients with type 2 diabetes. They reported a relatively well-preserved insulinotropic effect of GIP injected intravenously as a bolus. The insulin response to this bolus was somewhat reduced in comparison to that in control subjects, but only to the same degree as for a similar bolus administration of GLP-1. Only when GIP was infused over longer periods (up to 240 min) during hyperglycemic clamps (glucose concentration ∼15 mmol/l) could a clear reduction in insulinotropic effectiveness, even at vastly supraphysiologcal GIP doses, be demonstrated (61). This finding suggests a rapid desensitization of the signaling via GIP receptors in type 2 diabetic patients, the molecular nature of which needs to be studied in greater detail. It might be related to GIP hypersecretion (vide supra), chronic hyperglycemia (69), other metabolic abnormalities, or genetic traits. Along the same line, in first-degree relatives of type 2 diabetic patients, GIP bolus injection (rather than continuous infusion) (60) did not reveal differences in insulinotropic responses (62).

If the impaired insulinotropic response to GIP in normal glucose tolerant first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes is of pathophysiological importance, the subgroup with a subnormal stimulation of insulin secretion by GIP (Fig. 1) should be at especially high risk to progress to diabetes. We are currently following up our cohort (60) to assess their glucose tolerance status. After 4 years, only in a few subjects was a deterioration in glucose tolerance noted, and there was no clear difference related to their previous insulinotropic response with GIP infused during a hyperglycemic clamp (M.A.N., B.B., J.J.M., unpublished observations).

GIP/GLP-1 RECEPTOR KNOCKOUT STUDIES

The quantitative impact of incretin hormones can be derived from studies of animals with a targeted disruption of the GIP (71) and GLP-1 (72,73) receptor genes. In both cases, oral glucose tolerance is diminished. The disruption of signaling through a single incretin receptor may not fully disclose the importance of that particular pathway, because compensatory mechanisms may be active. For example, GLP-1 receptor knockout mice display enhanced secretion of and sensitivity to GIP (74). Nevertheless, double incretin receptor knockout mice, which lack the possibility for compensation through any known important incretin hormone, do not present with an overtly diabetic phenotype (75,76). Therefore, it is unlikely that impairments in incretin secretion and insulinotropic action alone explain the phenotype of type 2 diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS AND HYPOTHESIS

Although clearly and uniformly a reduced insulinotropic response to exogenous GIP has been described in patients with type 2 diabetes (Table 1), and despite the fact that such a secretory abnormality can be found in ∼50% of first-degree relatives (60), it must now be considered unlikely that type 2 diabetes is simply accompanied (or even preceded) by an underexpression of endocrine pancreatic GIP receptors as previously postulated by us (63). The reasons are 1) a relatively well-preserved insulin secretory response to acute stimulation with a GIP bolus injection (61,70); 2) an unimpaired incretin effect in subjects characterized by a reduced insulinotropic responsiveness toward GIP during hyperglycemic clamps (22); and 3) the failure of a reduced insulinotropic response to exogenous GIP to predict deteriorations in oral glucose tolerance (M.A.N., B.B., J.J.M., unpublished observations.)

Nevertheless, abnormalities in the response to GIP may theoretically initiate the process leading from normal to impaired glucose tolerance (Fig. 2), as suggested by studies with incretin receptor knockout mice (71). Given the quantitative impact of a normal incretin effect to the overall insulin secretory response to oral glucose (14–16,18,77), and the quantitatively significant reduction of the incretin effect in patients with type 2 diabetes (14) along with the reduced insulinotropic effectiveness of GIP (Table 1), it is very likely that this contributes to the phenotypic abnormalities in β-cell function typical for type 2 diabetic patients (6,62). Such processes may be the initial trigger to the deterioration of glucose tolerance, or mediate, via “glucose toxicity” or other mechanisms, the loss of glucose control also at later stages of type 2 diabetes (Fig. 2). These aspects require more detailed studies into the secretion and action of incretin hormones in patients with type 2 diabetes, their first-degree relatives, and other high-risk groups. Such knowledge will certainly provide the pathophysiological background required for tailoring incretin-based therapeutics to the needs of patients or subjects at risk to develop type 2 diabetes.

FIG. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 1.

Effect of an intravenous infusion of GIP during hyperglycemic clamp experiments (∼145 mg/dl; 8 mmol/l) in healthy control subjects without diabetic relatives (•), in type 2 diabetic patients (•), and in first-degree relatives of type 2 diabetic patients (♦) on insulin (A and C) and C-peptide (B and D) concentrations. P values were the result of repeated-measures ANOVA (A: by group; B: with time; A and B: interaction of group assignment and time). *Significant differences at specific time points (P ≤ 0.05, Duncan’s post hoc test). In the right panels, individual insulin (C) and C-peptide (D) responses in first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes are shown. Dashed lines are 95% confidence intervals for responses in healthy control subjects. Approximately half of the relatives have subnormal insulin and C-peptide responses. Modified from Meier et al. (60).

FIG. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 2.

Hypothetical sequence of events concerning the insulinotropic action of GIP in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes. GIP may play a role in the initiation of impaired β-cell function in first-degree relatives of type 2 diabetic patients. However, GIP action may be reversibly impaired at later stages in the development of type 2 diabetes.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Insulinotropic effects of GIP in patients with type 2 diabetes

Acknowledgments

Studies reported in this article were in part supported by grant Na 203/6-1 (to M.A.N.) from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bonn Bad Godesberg, Germany, and by the Deutsche Diabetes-Gesellschaft/Menarini Pharma Deutschland (individual project support to J.J.M.).

Footnotes

  • This article is based on a presentation at a symposium. The symposium and the publication of this article were made possible by an unrestricted educational grant from Servier.

    • Accepted May 18, 2004.
    • Received March 9, 2004.
  • DIABETES

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    Moore B, Edie ES, Abram JH: On the treatment of diabetes mellitus by acid extract of duodenal mucous membrane. Biochem J1 :28 –38,1906
  2. ↵
    Ørskov C, Rabenhøj L, Wettergren A, Kofod H, Holst JJ: Tissue and plasma concentrations of amidated and glycine-extended glucagon-like peptide 1 in humans. Diabetes43 :535 –539,1994
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Deacon CF, Nauck MA, Meier J, Hücking K, Holst JJ: Degradation of endogenous and exogenous gastric inhibitory polypeptide in healthy and in type 2 diabetic subjects as revealed using a new assay for the intact peptide. J Clin Endocrinol Metab85 :3575 –3581,2000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    Eaton RP, Allen RC, Schade DS, Erickson KM, Standefer J: Prehepatic insulin production in man: kinetic analysis using peripheral connecting peptide behaviour. J Clin Endocrinol Metab51 :520 –528,1980
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. Polonsky KS, Licinio-Paixao J, Given BD, Pugh W, Rue P, Galloway J, Karrison T, Frank B: Use of biosynthetic human C-peptide in the measurement of insulin secretion rates in normal volunteers and type 1 diabetic patients. J Clin Invest77 :98 –105,1986
  6. ↵
    Polonsky KS, Given BD, Hirsch LJ, Tillil H, Shapiro ET, Frank BH, Galloway JA, Van Cauter E: Abnormal patterns of insulin secretion in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med318 :1231 –1239,1988
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    Creutzfeldt W: The incretin concept today. Diabetologia16 :75 –85,1979
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. Holst JJ: Glucagonlike peptide 1: a newly discovered gastrointestinal hormone. Gastroenterology107 :1848 –1855,1994
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    Nauck MA: Glucagonlike peptide 1. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes4 :256 –261,1997
    OpenUrl
  10. Nauck MA: Is glucagon-like peptide 1 an incretin hormone? Diabetologia42 :373 –379,1999
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    Meier JJ, Nauck MA, Schmidt WE, Gallwitz B: Gastric inhibitory polypeptide: the neglected incretin revisited. Regul Pept107 :1 –13,2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    Drucker DJ: Biological actions and therapeutic potential of the glucagon-like peptides. Gastroenterology122 :531 –544,2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. ↵
    Nauck MA, Meier JJ, Creutzfeldt W: Incretins and their analogues as new antidiabetic drugs. Drug News Perspect16 :413 –422,2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    Nauck M, Stöckmann F, Ebert R, Creutzfeldt W: Reduced incretin effect in type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes. Diabetologia29 :46 –54,1986
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. ↵
    Shuster LT, Go VLW, Rizza RA, O’Brien PC, Service FJ: Incretin effect due to increased secretion and decreased clearance of insulin in normal humans. Diabetes37 :200 –203,1988
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    Tillil H, Shapiro ET, Miller A, Karrison T, Frank BH, Galloway JA, Rubenstein AH, Polonsky KS: Dose-dependent effects of oral and intravenous glucose on insulin secretion and clearance in normal humans. Am J Physiol (Endocrinol Metab)254 :E349 –E357,1988
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Gibby OM, Hales CN: Oral glucose decreases hepatic extraction of insulin. Br Med J286 :921 –923,1983
  18. ↵
    Shapiro ET, Tillil H, Miller MA, Frank BH, Galloway JA, Rubenstein AH, Polonsky KS: Insulin secretion and clearance: comparison after oral and intravenous glucose. Diabetes36 :1365 –1371,1987
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    Köbberling J, Tillil H, Lorenz H-J: Genetics of type 2 A- and type 2 B-diabetes mellitus (Abstract). Diabetes Res Clin Pract1 (Suppl. 1) :311 ,1985
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    Tuomilehto J, Lindstrom J, Eriksson JG, Valle TT, Hamalainen H, Ilanne-Parikka P, Keinanen-Kiukaanniemi S, Laakso M, Louheranta A, Rastas M, Salminen V, Uusitupa M: Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med344 :1343 –1350,2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. ↵
    Chiasson JL, Josse RG, Gomis R, Hanefeld M, Karasik A, Laakso M: Acarbose for prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus: the STOP-NIDDM randomised trial. Lancet359 :2072 –2077,2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. ↵
    Nauck MA, Gabrys B, Holst JJ, Meier JJ, Gallwitz B, Schmidt WE: Quantification of the incretin effect in first-degree relatives of type 2 diabetic patients compared to healthy control subjects (Abstract). Diabetologia44 (Suppl. 1) :A195 ,2001
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    D’Alessio D, Thirlby R, Laschansky E, Zebroski H, Ensinck J: Response of tGLP-1 to nutrients in humans. Digestion54 :377 –379,1993
    OpenUrlWeb of Science
  24. Herrmann C, Göke R, Richter G, Fehmann HC, Arnold R, Göke B: Glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucose-dependent insulin-releasing polypeptide plasma levels in response to nutrients. Digestion56 :117 –126,1995
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. ↵
    Qualmann C, Nauck MA, Holst JJ, Ørskov C, Creutzfeldt W: Glucagon-like peptide 1 (7–36 amide) secretion in response to luminal sucrose from the upper and lower gut: a study using alpha-glucosidase inhibition (acarbose). Scand J Gastroenterol30 :892 –896,1995
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    Grandt D, Sieburg B, Sievert J, Schimiczek M, Becker U, Holtmann D: Is GLP-1 (9–36)amide an endogenous antagonist at GLP-1 receptors? (Abstract). Digestion55 :302 ,1994
    OpenUrl
  27. Knudsen LB, Pridal L: Glucagon-like peptide-1-(9–36) amide is a major metabolite of glucagon-like peptide-1-(7–36) amide after in vivo administration to dogs, and it acts as an antagonist on the pancreatic receptor. Eur J Pharmacol318 :429 –435,1996
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. Deacon CF, Hughes TE, Holst JJ: GLP-1 [9–36 amide] neither affects insulin release nor antagonises the insulinotropic effects of GLP-1 [7–36 amide] (Abstract). Diabetologia42 (Suppl. 1) :A198 ,1999
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    Vahl TP, Paty BW, Fuller BD, Prigeon RL, D’Alessio DA: Effects of GLP-1-(7–36)NH2, GLP-1-(7–37), and GLP-1-(9–36)NH2 on intravenous glucose tolerance and glucose-induced insulin secretion in healthy humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab88 :1772 –1779,2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. ↵
    Ørskov C, Jeppesen J, Madsbad S, Holst JJ: Proglucagon products in plasma of noninsulin-dependent diabetics and nondiabetic controls in the fasting state and after oral glucose and intravenous arginine. J Clin Invest87 :415 –423,1991
  31. ↵
    Nauck MA, Heimesaat MM, Ørskov C, Holst JJ, Ebert R, Creutzfeldt W: Preserved incretin activity of glucagon-like peptide 1 [7–36 amide] but not of synthetic human gastric inhibitory polypeptide in patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus. J Clin Invest91 :301 –307,1993
  32. ↵
    Vilsbøll T, Krarup T, Deacon CF, Madsbad S, Holst JJ: Reduced postprandial concentrations of intact biologically active glucagon-like peptide 1 in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes50 :609 –613,2001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    Toft-Nielsen MB, Damholt MB, Madsbad S, Hilsted LM, Hughes TE, Michelsen BK, Holst JJ: Determinants of the impaired secretion of glucagon-like peptide-1 in type 2 diabetic patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab86 :3717 –3723,2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. ↵
    Gribble FM, Williams L, Simpson AK, Reimann F: A novel glucose-sensing mechanism contributing to glucagon-like peptide-1 secretion from the GLUTag cell line. Diabetes52 :1147 –1154,2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    Nyholm B, Walker M, Gravholt CH, Shearing PA, Sturis J, Alberti KGMM, Holst JJ, Schmitz O: Twenty-four-hour insulin secretion rates, circulating concentrations of fuel substrates and gut incretin hormones in healthy offspring of type II (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic parents: evidence of several aberrations. Diabetologia42 :1314 –1323,1999
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  36. ↵
    Göke R, Fehmann HC, Linn T, Schmidt H, Krause M, Eng J, Göke B: Exendin-4 is a high potency agonist and truncated exendin-(9–39)-amide an antagonist at the glucagon-like peptide 1-(7–36)-amide receptor of insulin-secreting beta-cells. J Biol Chem268 :19650 –19655,1993
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    Thorens B, Porret A, Buhler L, Deng SP, Morel P, Widmann C: Cloning and functional expression of the human islet GLP-1 receptor. Demonstration that exendin-4 is an agonist and exendin-(9–39) an antagonist of the receptor. Diabetes42 :1678 –1682,1993
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    Edwards CMB, Todd JF, Mahmoudi M, Wang Z, Wang RM, Ghatei MA, Bloom SR: GLP-1 has a physiological role in the control of postprandial glucose in man: studies with the antagonist exendin 9–39. Diabetes48 :86 –93,1999
    OpenUrlAbstract
  39. ↵
    Kjems LL, Holst JJ, Vølund A, Madsbad S: The influence of GLP-1 on glucose-stimulated insulin secretion: effects on beta-cell sensitivity in type 2 and nondiabetic subjects. Diabetes52 :380 –386,2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. ↵
    Nauck MA, Kleine N, Ørskov C, Holst JJ, Willms B, Creutzfeldt W: Normalization of fasting hyperglycaemia by exogenous glucagon-like peptide 1 (7–36 amide) in type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients. Diabetologia36 :741 –744,1993
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  41. ↵
    Rachman J, Gribble FM, Barrow BA, Levy JC, Buchanan KD, Turner RC: Normalization of insulin responses to glucose by overnight infusion of glucagon-like peptide 1 (7–36) amide in patients with NIDDM. Diabetes45 :1524 –1530,1996
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. ↵
    Rachman J, Gribble FM, Levy JC, Turner RC: Near-normalization of diurnal glucose concentrations by continuous administration of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) in subjects with NIDDM. Diabetologia40 :205 –211,1997
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  43. Nauck MA, Weber I, Bach I, Richter S, Ørskov C, JJ H, Schmiegl W: Normalization of fasting glycaemia by intravenous GLP-1 ([7–36 amide] or [7–37]) in type 2-diabetic patients. Diabet Med15 :937 –945,1998
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  44. Willms B, Idowu K, Holst JJ, Creutzfledt W, Nauck MA: Overnight GLP-1 normalizes fasting but not daytime plasma glucose values in NIDDM patients. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes106 :103 –107,1998
    OpenUrlPubMed
  45. ↵
    Ritzel R, Schulte M, Porksen N, Nauck MS, Holst JJ, Juhl C, Marz W, Schmitz O, Schmiegel WH, Nauck MA: Glucagon-like peptide 1 increases secretory burst mass of pulsatile insulin secretion in patients with type 2 diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance. Diabetes50 :776 –784,2001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. ↵
    Willms B, Werner J, Holst JJ, Ørskov C, Creutzfeldt W, Nauck MA: Gastric emptying, glucose responses, and insulin secretion after a liquid test meal: effects of exogenous glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)-(7–36) amide in type 2 (noninsulin-dependent) diabetic patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab81 :327 –332,1996
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  47. ↵
    Meier JJ, Gallwitz B, Salmen S, Goetze O, Holst JJ, Schmidt WE, Nauck MA: Normalization of glucose concentrations and deceleration of gastric emptying after solid meals during intravenous glucagon-like peptide 1 in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab88 :2719 –2725,2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  48. ↵
    Byrne MM, Gliem K, Wank U, Arnold R, Katschinski M, Polonsky KS, Göke B: Glucagon-like peptide 1 improves the ability of the beta-cell to sense and respond to glucose in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. Diabetes47 :1259 –1265,1998
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. ↵
    Crockett SE, Mazzaferri EL, Cataland S: Gastric inhibitory peptide (GIP) in maturity-onset diabetes mellitus. Diabetes25 :931 .935,1976
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. Ross SA, Brown JC, Dupré J: Hypersecretion of gastric inhibitory polypeptide following oral glucose in diabetes mellitus. Diabetes26 :525 –529,1977
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  51. Ebert R, Creutzfeldt W: Hypo- and hypersecretion of GIP in maturity-onset diabetics. Diabetologia19 :271 –272,1980
    OpenUrl
  52. ↵
    Creutzfeldt W, Ebert R, Nauck M, Stockmann F: Disturbances of the entero-insular axis. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl82 :111 –119,1983
    OpenUrlPubMed
  53. ↵
    Jones IR, Owens DR, Luzio S, Williams S, Hayes TM: The glucose dependent insulinotropic polypeptide response to oral glucose and mixed meals is increased in patients with type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia32 :668 –677,1989
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  54. ↵
    Jorde R, Amland PF, Burhol PG, Giercksy K-E: What are “physiological” plasma levels in man after intravenous infusion of porcine GIP? Scand J Gastroenterol20 :268 –271,1985
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. ↵
    Sarson DL, Wood SM, Kansal PC, Bloom SR: Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide augmentation of insulin: physiology or pharmacology? Diabetes33 :389 –393,1984
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. ↵
    Amland PF, Jorde R, Aanderup S, Burhol PG, Giercksky K-E: Effects of intravenously infused porcine GIP on serum insulin, plasma C-peptide, and pancreatic polypeptide in non-insulin-dependent diabetes in the fasting state. Scand J Gastroenterol20 :315 –320,1985
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  57. ↵
    Jorde R, Burhol PG: The insulinotropic effect of gastric inhibitory polypeptide in non-insulin dependent diabetes. Ital J Gastroenterol19 :76 –78,1987
    OpenUrl
  58. ↵
    Jones IR, Owens DR, Moody AJ, Luzio SD, Morris T, Hayes TM: The effects of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide infused at physiological concentrations in normal subjects and type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients on glucose tolerance and B-cell secretion. Diabetologia30 :707 –712,1987
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. ↵
    Krarup T, Saurbrey N, Moody AJ, Kühl C, Madsbad S: Effect of porcine gastric inhibitory polypeptide on β-cell function in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Metabolism36 :677 –682,1987
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  60. ↵
    Meier JJ, Hücking K, Holst JJ, Deacon CF, Schmiegel WH, Nauck MA: Reduced insulinotropic effect of gastric inhibitory polypeptide in first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes50 :2497 –2504,2001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  61. ↵
    Vilsbøll T, Krarup T, Madsbad S, Holst JJ: Defective amplification of the late phase insulin response to glucose by GIP in obese type II diabetic patients. Diabetologia45 :1111 –1119,2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  62. ↵
    Cerasi E, Luft R: The plasma insulin response to glucose infusion in healthy subjects and in diabetes mellitus. Acta Endocrinol (Copenh)55 :278 –304,1967
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  63. ↵
    Holst JJ, Gromada J, Nauck MA: The pathogenesis of NIDDM involves a defective expression of the GIP receptor. Diabetologia40 :984 –986,1997
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  64. ↵
    Lynn FC, Pamir N, Ng EH, McIntosh CH, Kieffer TJ, Pederson RA: Defective glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor expression in diabetic fatty Zucker rats. Diabetes50 :1004 –1011,2001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. ↵
    Chang AM, Jakobsen G, Sturis J, Smith MJ, Bloem CJ, An B, Galecki A, Halter JB: The GLP-1 derivative NN2211 restores beta-cell sensitivity to glucose in type 2 diabetic patients after a single dose. Diabetes52 :1786 –1791,2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  66. ↵
    Gromada J, Dissing S, Bokvist K, Renström E, Froekjaer-Jensen J, Wulff BS, Rorsman P: Glucagon-like peptide I increases cytoplasmic cacium in insulin-secreting βTC3-cells by enhancement of intracellular calcium mobilization. Diabetes44 :767 –774,1995
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  67. Gromada J, Bokvist K, Ding WG, Holst JJ, Nielsen JH, Rorsman P: Glucagon-like peptide 1 (7–36) amide stimulates exocytosis in human pancreatic beta-cells by both proximal and distal regulatory steps in stimulus-secretion coupling. Diabetes47 :57 –65,1998
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. ↵
    Gromada J, Holst JJ, Rorsman P: Cellular regulation of islet hormone secretion by the incretin hormone glucagon-like peptide 1. Pflügers Arch - Eur J Physiol435 :583 –594,1998
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  69. ↵
    Lynn FC, Thompson SA, Pospisilik JA, Ehses JA, Hinke SA, Pamir N, McIntosh CH, Pederson RA: A novel pathway for regulation of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) receptor expression in beta cells. Faseb J17 :91 –93,2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  70. ↵
    Meier JJ, Nauck MA, Siepmann N, Greulich M, Holst JJ, Deacon CF, Schmidt WE, Gallwitz B: Similar insulin secretory response to a gastric inhibitory polypeptide bolus injection at euglycemia in first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes and control subjects. Metabolism52 :1579 –1585,2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  71. ↵
    Miyawaki K, Yamada Y, Yano H, Niwa H, Ban N, Ihara Y, Kubota A, Fujimoto S, Kajikawa M, Kuroe A, Tsuda K, Hashimoto H, Yamashita T, Jomori T, Tashiro F, Miyazaki J-i, Seino Y: Glucose intolerance caused by a defect in the entero-insular axis: A study in gastric inhibitory polypeptide receptor knockout mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A96 :14843 –14847,1999
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. ↵
    Scrocchi LA, Brown TJ, MaClusky N, Brubaker PL, Auerbach AB, Joyner AL, Drucker DJ: Glucose intolerance but normal satiety in mice with a null mutation in the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor gene. Nat Med2 :1254 –1258,1996
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  73. ↵
    Scrocchi LA, Marshall BA, Cook SM, Brubaker PL, Drucker DJ: Identification of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) actions essential for glucose homeostasis in mice with disruption of GLP-1 receptor signaling. Diabetes47 :632 –639,1998
    OpenUrlAbstract
  74. ↵
    Pederson RA, Satkunarajah M, McIntosh CH, Scrocchi LA, Flamez D, Schuit F, Drucker DJ, Wheeler MB: Enhanced glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide secretion and insulinotropic action in glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor -/- mice. Diabetes47 :1046 –1052,1998
    OpenUrlAbstract
  75. ↵
    Hansotia T, Baggio LL, Tsukiyama K, Miyawaki K, Yamada Y, Thorens B, Seino Y, Drucker DJ: Combined genetic disruption of incretin signalling produces abnormalities in glucose homeostasis and body weight in GLP-1R–/–:GIPR–/– double mutant mice (Abstract). Diabetes51 (Suppl. 2) :A66 ,2002
    OpenUrl
  76. ↵
    Hansotia T, Baggio L, Yamada Y, Tsukiyama S, Preitner F, Thorens B, Seino Y, Drucker D: Combined genetic disruption of dual incretin receptor signalling pathways reveals novel glucose lowering properties of DPP IV inhibitors in mice (Abstract). Diabetes52 (Suppl. 1) :A77 ,2003
    OpenUrl
  77. ↵
    Nauck MA, Homberger E, Siegel EG, Allen RC, Eaton RP, Ebert R, Creutzfeldt W: Incretin effects of increasing glucose loads in man calculated from venous insulin and C-peptide responses. J Clin Endocrinol Metab63 :492 –498,1986
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this Issue

December 2004, 53(suppl 3)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by Author
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Gastric Inhibitory Polypeptide and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 in the Pathogenesis of Type 2 Diabetes
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Gastric Inhibitory Polypeptide and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 in the Pathogenesis of Type 2 Diabetes
Michael A. Nauck, Birgit Baller, Juris J. Meier
Diabetes Dec 2004, 53 (suppl 3) S190-S196; DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.53.suppl_3.S190

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

Gastric Inhibitory Polypeptide and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 in the Pathogenesis of Type 2 Diabetes
Michael A. Nauck, Birgit Baller, Juris J. Meier
Diabetes Dec 2004, 53 (suppl 3) S190-S196; DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.53.suppl_3.S190
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INCRETIN HORMONES
    • QUANTIFICATION OF THE INCRETIN EFFECT
    • GLP-1 SECRETION
    • INSULINOTROPIC (AND OTHER) GLP-1 ACTIONS
    • GIP SECRETION
    • INSULINOTROPIC GIP ACTIONS
    • GIP/GLP-1 RECEPTOR KNOCKOUT STUDIES
    • CONCLUSIONS AND HYPOTHESIS
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • The High-Fat Diet–Fed Mouse
  • Stimulation of Insulin Secretion by Intravenous Bolus Injection and Continuous Infusion of Gastric Inhibitory Polypeptide in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Healthy Control Subjects
  • Signaling Elements Involved in the Metabolic Regulation of mTOR by Nutrients, Incretins, and Growth Factors in Islets
Show more Section V: The Incretin Pathway

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Online Ahead of Print
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Collections
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes Care
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Diabetes Spectrum
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Print ISSN: 0012-1797, Online ISSN: 1939-327X.