Why the study?
Does genetic deletion of the GLP-1 receptor alter cardiac structure and function in mice?
Does genetic deletion of the GLP-1 receptor alter cardiac structure and function in mice?
Genetic deletion of the GLP-1 receptor in mice leads to impaired cardiac structure and function, demonstrating an essential physiological role for GLP-1R in the cardiovascular system.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
GLP-1R deletion impairs murine cardiac function; leaves open its necessity for human cardiovascular health and GLP-1RA effects.
Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) acts via its G protein-coupled receptor (GLP-1R) to regulate blood glucose. Although the GLP-1R is widely expressed in peripheral tissues, including the heart, and exogenous GLP-1 administration increases heart rate and blood pressure in rodents, the physiological importance of GLP-1R action in the cardiovascular system remains unclear. We now show that 2-month-old mice with genetic deletion of the GLP-1R (GLP-1R(-/-)) exhibit reduced resting heart rate and elevated left ventricular (LV) end diastolic pressure compared with CD-1 wild-type controls. At the age of 5 months, echocardiography and histology demonstrate increased LV thickness in GLP-1R(-/-) mice. Although baseline hemodynamic parameters of GLP-1R(-/-) did not differ significantly from those of wild type, GLP-1R(-/-) mice displayed impaired LV contractility and diastolic function after insulin administration. The defective cardiovascular response to insulin was not attributable to a generalized defect in the stress response, because GLP-1R(-/-) mice responded appropriately to insulin with increased c-fos expression in the hypothalamus and increased circulating levels of glucagon and epinephrine. Furthermore, LV contractility after exogenous epinephrine infusion was also reduced in GLP-1R(-/-) mice. These findings provide new evidence implicating an essential role for GLP-1R in the control of murine cardiac structure and function in vivo.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gros et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: