1 Department of Medicine M (Endocrinology and Diabetes), Århus Kommunehospital, University Hospital of Aarhus, 8000 Århus; 2 Novo Nordisk, 2880 Bagsvaerd; and 3 Department of Medicine, Kolding Sygehus, 6000 Kolding, Denmark; 4 Endocrinology Division, National Science Foundation Center for Biological Timing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908; 5 Guilford, Connecticut; and 6 Amylin Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, California 92121
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Amylin is stored in the pancreatic -cell granules and
cosecreted with insulin in response to nutrient stimuli. To gain
further insight into control of hormonal release in
-cell
physiology, we examined whether amylin, like insulin, circulates in a
high-frequency oscillatory pattern, and if it does, to compare the
secretory patterns of the two hormones. Eight overnight-fasted healthy
individuals were studied during intravenous glucose infusion (2.0 mg · kg
1 · min
1).
Blood was collected every minute for 90 min and analyzed in triplicate
for amylin, total amylin immunoreactivity (TAI), and insulin. Mean
plasma concentrations of amylin (nonglycosylated), TAI (nonglycosylated
plus glycosylated), insulin, and glucose were 2.77 ± 1.21 pmol/l,
7.60 ± 1.73 pmol/l, 50.4 ± 17.5 pmol/l, and 5.9 ± 0.3 mmol/l,
respectively. The 90-min time series of amylin, TAI, and insulin were
analyzed for periodicity (by spectral analysis, autocorrelation
analysis, and deconvolution analysis) and regularity [by
approximate entropy (ApEn)]. Significant spectral density peaks
were demonstrated by a random shuffling technique in 7 (out of 7), 8 (out of 8), and 8 (out of 8) time series, respectively, whereas
autocorrelation analysis revealed significant pulsatility in 5 (out of
7), 7 (out of 8), and 5 (out of 8), respectively. The dominant
periodicity of oscillations determined by spectral analysis was 4.6 ± 0.3, 4.6 ± 0.4, and 6.5 ± 1.1 min/pulse, respectively (amylin vs.
insulin, P = 0.017, TAI vs. insulin, P = 0.018). By deconvolution analysis, amylin and insulin periodicities
were, respectively, 6.3 ± 1.0 and 5.5 ± 0.6 min. By application of
the regularity statistic, ApEn, 6 (out of 7), 7 (out of 8), and 6 (out
of 8), respectively, were found to be significantly different from
random. In conclusion, like several other hormones, circulating amylin
concentrations exhibit oscillations in the secretory patterns for
nonglycosylated as well as glycosylated forms. Whether the high-frequency pulsatile release of amylin is disturbed in diabetes is
not known.
amylin secretion; insulin secretion; amylin pulsatility
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
AMYLIN IS A 37-AMINO ACID POLYPEPTIDE produced
in pancreatic -cells by posttransscriptional processing of
pre-proamylin. The peptide is not a product of insulin biosynthesis and
is coded by a different chromosome. The amylin precursor is transferred with proinsulin to the trans-Golgi-apparatus, where both precursors are
processed into mature forms sharing the processing enzyme prohormone
convertase (2). Amylin is colocalized with insulin in secretory
granules and secreted in response to nutrient stimuli and other insulin
secretagogues (10, 18).
It has been demonstrated that amylin, in addition to a native form,
circulates in at least three different glycosylated forms, with
O-glycosylations at position 6, position 9, or both (20, 32). The
potential importance of these forms is so far not clear. Amylin
exhibits a response to an oral glucose tolerance test similar to that
of insulin (30). In healthy subjects, the circulating amylin-to-insulin
molar ratio appears to be 1-2% in the fasting state, but this
ratio has been found to be higher in a number of circumstances, e. g.,
recent data in rats have demonstrated that both the circulating and the
islet amylin-to-insulin molar ratios increase in tolbutamide-treated
euglycemic rats used as a model of the overworked -cell (15). From
an intracellular point of view, it is of interest that amylin
secretion, in contrast to insulin, can be stimulated by glucose in the
absence of Ca2+ in rat islet monolayer cultures (12). Thus
regulation of the release of the two hormones appears to be at least
partly independent.
It has been known for more than two decades that insulin is secreted in
a high-frequency pulsatile pattern with a periodicity of 5-15 min
(9, 14). Whether amylin is characterized by a similar release pattern
is unknown. The present study was consequently undertaken to seek
further insights into -cell physiology and amylin secretion by
examining secretory patterns of amylin in healthy humans during
moderate hyperglycemia. To define high-frequency oscillations, time
series were assessed by spectral analysis, autocorrelation analysis,
deconvolution analysis, and approximate entropy (ApEn). Time series of
amylin (nonglycosylated) and total amylin immunoreactivity (TAI;
nonglycosylated plus glycosylated) were compared with those of insulin.
![]() |
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Subjects and design. The protocol was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and was approved by the local Ethical Committee of Aarhus County. Eight healthy volunteers, four male and four female, mean (±SD) age 28.8 ± 4.7 yr and body mass index (BMI) 22.6 ± 3.4 kg/m2, were studied. None had a family history of diabetes mellitus or took regular medication.
Protocol.
Studies were performed after a 10-h overnight fast. At
0800, each subject was placed in a bed, and intravenous
catheters were inserted in each antecubital vein for infusion and
sampling purposes. After 30 min (t = 0), glucose infusion at a
constant rate (2 mg · kg1 · min
1)
was initiated. Glucose infusion was performed to stimulate amylin secretion and reach concentrations within the detectable range of the
amylin assay. After another 60 min, steady state was assumed, and blood
was collected every minute for 90 min in a heated hand vein to
arterialize the blood. Further details on the sampling procedure have
been described previously (24). Blood samples were stored at
20°C and analyzed within a month.
Assays. Amylin and TAI concentrations in serum were measured in triplicate by use of two previously reported monoclonal antibody-based sandwich assays (20). Briefly, peptide is captured out of a 50-µl plasma sample (1-h incubation at room temperature) by an amylin-specific monoclonal antibody coated on the black 96-well plate. After the plate is washed, an alkaline phosphatase-conjugated monoclonal antibody specific to the COOH-terminal end of amylin is added to the well and incubated for 3 h at room temperature. After another wash, a signal is generated by adding the fluorescent substrate 4-methylumbelliferyl phosphate. Plates are read with a fluorescent plate reader (Dynatech, Chantilly, VA) and sample fluorescence is compared with that of a synthetic human amylin standard curve. Both assays use the same detection antibody but employ different capture antibodies. The amylin assay uses a detection antibody shown to detect nonmodified human amylin, but not the recently reported glycosylated forms (32). The TAI assay detects nonmodified amylin and the glycosylated forms. The cross-reactivities of both assays to proamylin, insulin, calcitonin gene-related peptides (I and II), and calcitonin are <0.05%. The intra- and interassay coefficients of variation for the assays are <10 and <15%, respectively (20).
Serum insulin concentration was measured in duplicate by a two-site immunospecific insulin ELISA, as previously described (1). The detection range was 5-600 pmol/l. At medium (150 pmol/l), medium-high (200 pmol/l), and high (350 pmol/l) insulin concentrations, the interassay coefficients of variation were 4.5, 4.9, and 5.5%, respectively, and the intra-assay coefficients of variation were 2.8, 2.6, and 2.4%, respectively. There was no cross-reactivity with proinsulin, split 32,33- and des-31,32 proinsulin, C-peptide, insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I, IGF-II, and glucagon. The antibodies cross-react 30 and 63% with split-65,66 and des-64,65 proinsulin, respectively.Data analysis. Autocorrelation and cross-correlation analysis and spectral analysis were performed with the software SPSS version 8.0 (SPSS , Chicago, IL), which was also used for detrending and random shuffling procedures. Spectral analysis, autocorrelation analysis, and cross-correlation all require stationary time series (4). Despite the constant glucose infusion rate, minor trends were observed in some data sets. Before autocorrelation analysis and spectral analysis, data were therefore stationarized by subtraction of the seven-point equal-weighted centered moving average from the original data set, and the analyses were applied to the residuals. This procedure serves only detrending purposes and does not smooth out high-frequency variations in the data. The choice of 7 min as the length of the moving average was based on the knowledge of insulin pulse frequency reported to be 5-15 min (14, 24). To ensure that observed high-frequency oscillations were not a product of the detrending procedure performed, autocorrelation and spectral analysis were applied to first-difference derivatives as well.
Autocorrelation and cross-correlation. Autocorrelation analysis was performed on the stationarized time series without prior smoothing to allow detection of high-frequency pulsatility. By autocorrelation analysis, the data from the observed time series are correlated pointwise to an exact copy lagged by 1-min intervals. An autocorrelation coefficient was considered significant if the first positive peak after the first trough exceeded the 95% confidence interval or if the autocorrelogram itself had a cyclic pattern and one of the subsequent peaks exceeded the confidence limit.
To determine the frequency of oscillations by autocorrelation, data were pooled from the eight subjects. M values were transformed to Z values by Fisher's Z transformation, and the mean values were calculated and transformed to m values by the inverse procedure (19). 95% Confidence intervals for autocorrelation analysis were calculated as ±2/Spectral analysis.
The principle of spectral analysis is to break down a time series into
cosine waves of different periods and quantify each cosine wave in
terms of the amplitude that allows the best fit to the observed data.
Spectral analysis was performed using the Tukey-Hanning window.
Different window lengths were tested. Very erratic spectra were
obtained using a short window length, whereas smoother but less
well-defined spectra with broad peaks were obtained by application of a
longer window length (11). To achieve a balance between the stability
and fidelity, a window length of 9 was used. A spectral
density plot was created using the time domain, and the peak value was
determined. To assess the significance of the spectral density peak, a
method of random shuffling spectral analyses was applied. Each time
series was subjected to computerized random shuffling, and after each
time, spectral analysis was performed. The spectral density value at
each frequency of these 100 random series was determined. The
distribution of the spectral densities at each frequency after random
shuffling was in good accordance with normal distribution. The means ± SD at each frequency tested were calculated, and confidence
intervals were estimated on the basis of a 2
distribution, as given by Jenkins and Watts (11) and further described
by Chatfield (4). Spectral analysis was considered significant if the
dominant peak exceeded the confidence interval.
Deconvolution analysis. Plasma amylin and insulin concentration time series were analyzed by deconvolution analysis to quantify basal secretion, interpulse interval, secretory burst mass, and amplitude. Deconvolution was performed with an iterative multiparameter technique by use of the following assumptions: 1) Hormones are secreted in a finite number of bursts with 2) an individual amplitude, 3) a common half-duration superimposed on a basal time-invariant secretory rate, and 4) a biexponential disappearance rate of amylin and insulin (24). The disappearance model for amylin consisted of estimated half-lives of 3 and 13 min, with a fractional slow component of 28% (5). A variety of half-lives were tested, and whereas calculated total release and distribution were affected by kinetics, detected frequency was not. The heterogeneity of TAI, consisting of different forms of amylin with different kinetics, does not allow deconvolution to be carried out on TAI concentration time series. For insulin, the estimated half-lives were 2.8 and 5 min, with a fractional slow compartment of 28% (24).
ApEn. Regularity of serum amylin and insulin concentration time series was assessed by the model-independent and scale-invariant statistic ApEn. ApEn measures the logarithmic likelihood that runs of patterns that are close (within r) for m contiguous observations remain close (within the tolerance width r) on subsequent incremental comparisons. A precise mathematical definition has been prescribed by Pincus (21). ApEn is to be considered a family of parameters dependent of the choice of the input parameters m and r, and it is to be compared only when applied to time series of equal length. In this study, ApEn was calculated with r = 20% of the SD in the individual time series and m = 1, parameter choices that are standardly utilized in virtually all endocrinological applications of ApEn. A larger absolute value of ApEn indicates a higher degree of process randomness. ApEn is rather stable to noise that is withheld within the tolerance width r. There is a precedence for detrending the time series by first differencing before ApEn calculation. To evaluate the effect of trends in the time series, ApEn was calculated on the original data sets as well as on detrended data. Observed ApEn values were compared with ApEn calculations performed on randomly shuffled series, and ApEn was considered as significant when the observed value differed from maximally random by two or more SDs of ApEn.
Statistical analysis.
All data are given as means ± SD. Comparisons of data for amylin,
TAI, and insulin were carried out by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
Bivariate correlations were calculated by Spearman's .
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Plasma amylin and insulin concentrations.
In one of the study subjects, almost all measured values of amylin fell
below the detection limit, and this time series was consequently
excluded from further calculations. Therefore, seven amylin, eight TAI,
and eight insulin concentration time series were analyzed. Average
concentrations of amylin, TAI, and insulin are given in Table
1. During modest hyperglycemia (plasma glucose 5.9 ± 0.3 mM), the molar ratios of amylin to TAI and of amylin to insulin
were 0.36 ± 0.10 and 0.06 ± 0.02, respectively. No systematic
changes in these ratios were observed over time. There was a
significant bivariate correlation between mean amylin concentration, mean TAI concentration, and mean insulin concentration when the study
subjects were compared. Representative time series of amylin, TAI, and
insulin for one study subject are shown in Fig.
1.
|
|
Deconvolution analysis. Secretory burst mass of amylin and insulin was 1.63 and 26.4 pM/burst, respectively, and the interpulse interval was estimated to be ~6 min. Data from the deconvolution analysis for amylin and insulin are given in Table 1.
Autocorrelation and cross-correlation.
The results for autocorrelation analysis of the individual time series
are given in Table 1. The estimated frequency was significantly slower
for insulin than for amylin and TAI (amylin vs. insulin, P = 0.042, TAI vs. insulin, P = 0.027). By autocorrelation analysis
of the pooled data set, amylin and TAI were characterized by a
pulsatile pattern, with a significant correlation at the lag time of 4 min (r = 0.25, P < 0.001, and r = 0.25, P < 0.001, respectively) indicating an interpulse interval in
this range. The autocorrelogram of insulin showed a similar pattern,
with a shoulder at 5 min and a peak at 9 min (lag time 9 min, r = 0.08, P = 0.05; Fig. 2).
|
Spectral analysis.
Results for the spectral analysis of the individual time series are
given in Table 1. As for autocorrelation analysis, the estimated
frequency was significantly slower for insulin than for amylin and TAI
(amylin vs. insulin, P = 0.017, TAI vs. insulin, P = 0.018). An example of spectral analysis for one individual is shown in
Fig. 3. A distinct peak exceeding the
confidence interval is seen in the spectral analysis of the observed
time series. Frequency estimations carried out on first-difference
derivatives gave almost identical results, indicating a stability
toward the procedure of detrending.
|
ApEn. Table 1 lists the ApEn values obtained when the defined input parameters are applied. Also, the number of time series significantly different from a random seed is shown. When applied to the raw data, 6 (out of 7), 7 (out of 8), and 7 (out of 8) of the amylin, TAI, and insulin time series, respectively, were tested as significantly different from random. When applied to first-difference derivatives, only 4, 3, and 1, respectively, were found to be significantly different from random. This might indicate that even the minor trends observed in these data sets may influence the ApEn calculations.
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Our study demonstrates for the first time regular cyclic oscillations
of amylin concentrations in healthy humans exposed to a modest and
constant intravenous glucose challenge. Although autocorrelation and
spectral analysis are designed to detect regularly recurring variations
in data series, deconvolution analysis (which is independent of this
assumption) also disclosed only a 15% coefficient of variation of
amylin interpulse intervals. This finding strongly suggests that amylin
during glucose stimulation, like insulin, is secreted in a pulsatile
manner. Dependent on the mathematical model employed, the pulse
frequency was found to be between 4 and 6 min. Similar to insulin, the
mechanisms of the regulation of pulsatile amylin secretion are not well
understood, but intracellular metabolic events in the -cell (25),
the intrinsic neural network within the pancreas (28), and a metabolic
feedback loop between the liver and the islets (31) probably all
contribute to the dynamic pulsatility of amylin as well as insulin release.
Amylin has been shown to exert actions on gastric emptying (16),
satiety (34), and the secretion of glucagon (8). Because the effects on
gastric emptying and satiety appear to be centrally mediated, it is not
likely that the oscillatory pattern of amylin concentrations is of
significant relevance for those actions. After administration of an
amylin antagonist, augmented insulin secretion has been shown in
perfused isolated rat islets (33) and in isolated rat -cells during
an arginine challenge (3). These findings strongly suggest the
possibility that amylin influences insulin secretion. Indeed, at high
doses, amylin has been found to suppress insulin secretion in perfused
rat pancreas (26). The amylin concentration at the
-cell level is
clearly much higher than the concentrations measured peripherally, and
thus it is tempting to suggest a possible paracrine regulatory role of
amylin on insulin secretion. Corelease of an inhibitor of insulin
secretion may serve as one of several mechanisms to prevent
inappropriate insulin release during glucose stimulation. It has
previously been demonstrated that not only insulin, but also glucagon
and somatostatin are released in a pulsatile manner from isolated canine pancreas (28). Like these hormones, amylin may thus contribute to the overall control of glucose homeostasis.
Another interesting observation in our study was that both amylin and
TAI were secreted in an oscillatory manner. This finding suggests, but
does not prove, that amylin is released from the -cells in both
nonglycosylated and glycosylated forms. If glycosylation were solely a
postsecretory event, one would expect the oscillatory pattern to be
less pronounced for the TAI concentration time series, which reflects
both nonglycosylated and glycosylated forms (20, 32).
Various techniques of time series analysis were applied to evaluate whether the observed time series were regular and pulsatile. Each method makes assumptions about the nature of the pulsatility and is differently affected by noise and changes in interpulse interval and pulse amplitude. Spectral analysis and autocorrelation analysis both require stationarity in the data and a fairly constant interpulse interval and pulse amplitude. Deconvolution analysis does not make these assumptions and can be applied to the original data sets. The latter method may lead to over- or underestimation of the number of pulses in the case of noise or missing data points. The pulse frequency is therefore presumably most correctly estimated by the former mentioned methods, but no single method is universally superior in addressing the question of pulsatility.
The interpulse interval of insulin observed in previous studies is reported to be between 4 and 13 min. This rather large variation may in part be due to differences in study conditions, and most previous studies have been carried out under basal conditions without glucose stimulation (9, 14). It has previously been suggested that a glucose challenge increases insulin pulse frequency (23), but it should be noticed that the issue is controversial (29). The pulse frequency found in our study is comparable to that in previous studies carried out during glucose infusion (23).
Another important parameter determining the pulse frequency is the sampling frequency. One-minute data have been shown to yield a higher calculated pulse frequency than 2-min sampling when estimated by pulse detection (22). Noise has a tendency to disable autocorrelation and cross-correlation analysis. It is therefore sometimes preferential to smooth the data before the analysis (14, 19). However, even a mild smoothing procedure like a 3-point moving average impairs the possibility to detect pulsatility below and near the frequency of 3 min. Consequently, we chose not to perform any smoothing before correlation analyses. It was therefore not surprising that not all concentration time series revealed significant autocorrelation.
ApEn is a complementary approach to time series analysis. It has been applied to various hormone concentration sequences and has been shown to be capable of discerning normality from pathophysiology (17). In the present study we found a difference in ApEn when applied to raw data compared with stationarized data, indicating an apparent higher regularity in the not detrended data. This may in part be explained by minor trends in the concentration time series, but the actual impact of this finding is uncertain.
Immunohistochemical studies provide evidence of colocalization of amylin and insulin in the same secretory granules (6), and the significant cross-correlations between amylin and TAI and between TAI and insulin would strongly support cosecretion of the hormones. The fact that cross-correlation analysis was significant when applied to the original data set, as well as to the residuals after detrending, indicates synchronicity of high-frequency oscillations as well as in response to the glucose challenge. The calculated difference in frequency between amylin and insulin indicated by autocorrelation and spectral analysis may therefore be a statistical estimation phenomenon rather than a physiological one. However, separate secretory pathways and regulatory mechanisms also have to be considered.
Our study illustrates that it is possible, despite a longer half-time and a less precise assay of amylin compared with insulin, to explore amylin pulsatility by analysis of concentration time series. This could be a useful tool in addressing questions concerning amylin interactions with insulin secretion.
In conclusion, the present study substantiates that amylin and
glycosylated amylin are secreted in a pulsatile manner after elevation
of plasma glucose by glucose infusion. Whether basal amylin
concentrations also exhibit an oscillatory pattern is not known.
Disorderly insulin secretion has been demonstrated in overt type 2 diabetes and in prediabetics with normal glucose tolerance (13, 19,
27). What remains to be evaluated is amylin release in -cell
disorders like type 2 diabetes mellitus and, in the prediabetic state,
whether disorderly amylin release may be a predictor of
-cell failure.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
---|
We thank Anette Mengel and Elsebeth Horneman for excellent technical assistance.
![]() |
FOOTNOTES |
---|
This study was supported by the Institute of Clinical Experimental Research, University of Århus, The Danish Research Council, The Danish Diabetic Association, and Foundation for Medical Research, Vejle County.
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: C. B. Juhl, Medical Dept. M (Endocrinology and Metabolism), Århus Univ. Hospital, 8000 Århus C, Denmark (E-mail: cbj{at}dadlnet.dk).
Received 21 May 1999; accepted in final form 12 October 1999.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1.
Andersen, L.,
B. Dinesen,
P. N. Jorgensen,
F. Poulsen,
and
M. E. Roder.
Enzyme immunoassay for intact human insulin in serum or plasma.
Clin. Chem.
39:
578-582,
1993
2.
Badman, M. K.,
K. I. Shennan,
J. L. Jermany,
K. Docherty,
and
A. Clark.
Procressing of pro-islet amyloid polypeptide (proIAPP) by the pro-hormone convertase PC2.
FEBS Lett.
378:
227-231,
1996[ISI][Medline].
3.
Bennet, W. M.,
C. S. Beis,
M. A. Ghatei,
P. G. Byfield,
and
S. R. Bloom.
Amylin tonally regulates arginine-stimulated insulin secretion in rats.
Diabetologia
37:
436-438,
1994[ISI][Medline].
4.
Chatfield, C.
The Analysis of Time Series. An Introduction. London: Chapman and Hall, 1996.
5.
Clodi, M.,
K. Thomaseth,
G. Pacini,
K. Hermann,
A. Kautzky-Willer,
W. Waldhäusl,
R. Prager,
and
B. Ludvik.
Distribution and kinetics of amylin in humans.
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.
274:
E903-E908,
1998
6.
Cooper, G. J.
Amylin compared with calcitonin gene-related peptide: structure, biology, and relevance to metabolic disease.
Endocr. Rev.
15:
163-201,
1994[ISI][Medline].
7.
Diggle, P. J.
Time Series, A Biostatistical Introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford Science Publication, 1990.
8.
Fineman, M. S.,
O. G. Kolterman,
R. G. Thompson,
and
J. E. Koda.
The human analogue pramlintide inhibited glucagon secretion in type 1 diabetic subjects (Abstract).
Diabetes
40:
30,
1997.
9.
Goodner, C. J.,
B. C. Walike,
D. J. Koerker,
J. W. Ensinck,
A. C. Brown,
E. W. Chideckel,
J. Palmer,
and
L. Kalnasy.
Insulin, glucagon and glucose exhibit synchronous, sustained oscillations in fasting monkeys.
Science
195:
177-179,
1977[ISI][Medline].
10.
Hartter, E.,
T. Svoboda,
B. Ludvik,
M. Schuller,
B. Lell,
E. Kuenburg,
M. Brunnbauer,
W. Woloszczuk,
and
R. Prager.
Basal and stimulated plasma levels of pancreatic amylin indicate its co-secretion with insulin in humans.
Diabetologia
34:
52-54,
1991[ISI][Medline].
11.
Jenkins, G. M.,
and
D. G. Watts.
Spectral Analysis and Its Applications. San Francisco: Holden-Day, 1966.
12.
Kahn, S.,
C. B. Verchere,
D. A. D. Alesio,
D. L. Cook,
and
W. Y. Fujimoto.
Evidence for selective release of rodent islet polypeptide through the constitutive secretory pathway.
Diabetologia
36:
570-573,
1993[ISI][Medline].
13.
Lang, D. A.,
D. R. Matthews,
M. Burnett,
and
R. C. Turner.
Brief, irregular oscillations of basal plasma insulin and glucose concentrations in diabetic man.
Diabetes
30:
435-439,
1981[Abstract].
14.
Lang, D. A.,
D. R. Matthews,
J. Peto,
and
R. C. Turner.
Cyclic oscillations of basal plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in human beings.
N. Engl. J. Med.
301:
1023-1027,
1979[Abstract].
15.
Leahy, J. L.,
and
M. S. Fineman.
Impaired phasic insulin and amylin secretion in diabetic rats.
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.
275:
E457-E462,
1998
16.
Macdonald, I. A.
Amylin and the gastrointestinal tract.
Diabet. Med.
14:
S24-S28,
1997[ISI][Medline].
17.
Meneilly, G. S.,
J. D. Veldhuis,
and
D. Elahi.
Disruption of the pulsatile and entropic modes of insulin release during an unvarying glucose stimulus in elderly individuals.
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.
84:
1938-1943,
1999
18.
Moore, C. X.,
and
G. J. S. Cooper.
Co-secretion of amylin and insulin from cultured islet beta-cells: modulation by nutrient secretagogues, islet hormones and hypoglycemic agents.
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
179:
1-9,
1991[ISI][Medline].
19.
O'Rahilly, S.,
R. C. Turner,
and
D. R. Matthews.
Impaired pulsatile secretion of insulin in relatives of patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes.
N. Engl. J. Med.
318:
1225-1230,
1988[Abstract].
20.
Percy, A. J.,
D. A. Trainor,
J. Rittenhouse,
J. Phelps,
and
J. E. Koda.
Development of sensitive immunoassays to detect amylin and amylin-like peptides in unextracted plasma.
Clin. Chem.
42:
576-585,
1996
21.
Pincus, S. M.
Approximate Entropy as a measure of system complexity.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:
2297-2301,
1991[Abstract].
22.
Pørksen, N.,
S. Munn,
J. Steers,
J. D. Veldhuis,
and
P. C. Butler.
Impact of sampling technique on appraisal of pulsatile insulin secretion by deconvolution and cluster analysis.
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.
269:
E1106-E1114,
1995
23.
Pørksen, N.,
S. Munn,
J. Steers,
J. D. Veldhuis,
and
P. C. Butler.
Effects of glucose ingestion vs. infusion on pulsatile insulin secretion. The incretin effect is achieved by amplification of insulin secretory burst mass.
Diabetes
45:
1317-1323,
1996[Abstract].
24.
Pørksen, N.,
B. Nyholm,
J. D. Veldhuis,
P. C. Butler,
and
O. Schmitz.
In humans at least 75% of insulin secretion arises from punctuated insulin secretory bursts.
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.
273:
E908-E914,
1997
25.
Rorsman, P.
The pancreatic beta-cell as a fuel sensor: an electrophysiologist's viewpoint.
Diabetologia
40:
487-495,
1997[ISI][Medline].
26.
Salas, M.,
R. A. Silvestre,
H. O. Garcia,
T. Fontela,
G. J. Rodriguez,
and
J. Marco.
Inhibitory effect of amylin (islet amyloid polypeptide) on insulin response to non-glucose stimuli. Study in perfused rat pancreas.
Diabete Metab.
21:
269-273,
1995[ISI][Medline].
27.
Schmitz, O.,
N. Pørksen,
B. Nyholm,
C. Skjaerbaek,
P. C. Butler,
J. D. Veldhuis,
and
S. M. Pincus.
Disorderly and nonstationary insulin secretion in relatives of patients with NIDDM.
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.
272:
E218-E226,
1997
28.
Stagner, J. I.,
E. Samols,
and
G. C. Weir.
Sustained oscillations of insulin, glucagon, and somatostatin from the isolated canine pancreas during exposure to a constant glucose concentration.
J. Clin. Invest.
65:
939-942,
1980[ISI][Medline].
29.
Sturis, J.,
N. M. O'Meara,
E. T. Shapiro,
J. D. Blackman,
H. Tillil,
K. S. Polonsky,
and
E. Van Cauter.
Differential effects of glucose stimulation upon rapid pulses and ultradian oscillations of insulin secretion.
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.
76:
895-901,
1993[Abstract].
30.
Thomaseth, K.,
G. Pacini,
M. Clodi,
A. Kautzky Willer,
J. J. Nolan,
R. Prager,
J. M. Olefsky,
and
B. Ludvik.
Amylin release during oral glucose tolerance test.
Diabet. Med.
14, Suppl.2:
S29-S34,
1997[ISI][Medline].
31.
Tornheim, K.
Are metabolic oscillations responsible for normal oscillatory insulin secretion?
Diabetes
46:
1375-1380,
1997[Abstract].
32.
Verchere, C. B.,
J. Rittenhouse,
A. Sofianos,
J. E. Koda,
and
S. E. Kahn.
Glycosylated amylin is secreted by human islets in vitro (Abstract).
Diabetes
1, Suppl.:
357,
1997.
33.
Wang, F.,
T. E. Adrian,
G. T. Westermark,
X. Ding,
T. Gasslander,
and
J. Permert.
Islet amyloid polypeptide tonally inhibits -,
-, and
-cell secretion in isolated rat pancreatic islets.
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.
276:
E19-E24,
1999
34.
Young, A.
Role of amylin in nutrient intakeanimal studies.
Diabet. Med.
14:
S14-S18,
1997[ISI][Medline].