Why the study?
Does a 6-week administration of hexarelin alter GH responsiveness and feeding behavior in young beagle dogs?
Does a 6-week administration of hexarelin alter GH responsiveness and feeding behavior in young beagle dogs?
Chronic hexarelin administration in dogs causes a biphasic GH response and differing time-courses for neuroendocrine and behavioral effects, suggesting different subtypes of central GH-releasing peptide receptors.
Should not guide hexarelin use in patients; leaves open distinct central GHRP receptor subtypes for neuroendocrine versus behavioral effects.
In this study we evaluated, in six young (5-7 year-old) beagle dogs, the effects of a 6-week administration of hexarelin (250 microg/kg s. c. twice daily) on the GH response to an acute challenge with hexarelin or GHRH (2 microg/kg i.v.), delivered before and after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment. The GH peak response to acute hexarelin or GHRH initially increased, with a maximum observed at the 3rd week, and then decreased to basal values (GHRH) or less (hexarelin) at the 6th week. These data would indicate that hexarelin initially primed the pituitary to acute administration of further hexarelin or of GHRH, followed by downregulation of the GH response to hexarelin and preservation of the response to GHRH. We then studied the rebound increase in GH secretion after withdrawal of an infusion of somatostatin (4 microg/kg per h for 1.5 h), a likely stimulus of endogenous GHRH function. The pattern obtained was similar to, though not superimposable upon, that ensuing after acute hexarelin or GHRH administration. Parallel evaluation of the acute orexigenic effect of hexarelin evinced a different time-course of the behavioural response, namely an acute feeding response to hexarelin that was abolished at the 3rd week and returned to normal at the 6th week. The differing timing of the neuroendocrine or behavioural response to hexarelin would suggest the existence of different subtypes of central nervous system GH-releasing peptide receptors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rigamonti et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: