Adipocyte insulin action in hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism

Philippa J. Marsden1,4, Alison P. Murdoch2 and Roy Taylor3

1 Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Dryburn Hospital, Durham, 2 Consultant Gynaecologist, Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne and 3 Professor of Metabolic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
In-vitro studies of adipose tissue have shown that patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) have marked insulin resistance, the abnormalities being more pronounced during amenorrhoea compared to following an ovulatory cycle. If the insulin resistance in PCOS is a reflection of anovulation then patients with hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism (HH) should also have a reduction in insulin sensitivity. This study was designed to investigate insulin sensitivity in patients with HH. Seven patients with HH were studied and compared with eight age and body mass index matched female controls. Adipocyte insulin receptor binding was measured and adipocyte insulin action was assessed by measuring initial rates of 3-O-methylglucose uptake and inhibition of lipolysis. The specific insulin receptor binding per 10 cm2 cell surface was 0.95 ± 0.25% in HH and 1.85 ± 0.14% in control patients (P < 0.01). Maximum rates of glucose uptake were also impaired in HH compared with controls (3-O-methylglucose transport 0.81 ± 0.22 versus 1.83 ± 0.2 pmol/10 cm2/5 s)(P < 0.01). Hence, patients with HH have impaired insulin sensitivity to a degree similar to that seen in PCOS, suggesting a direct effect of anovulation on insulin sensitivity.

Key words: hypogonadism/hypogonadotrophic/insulin action


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
In-vivo and in-vitro studies have shown that patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) are insulin resistant independent of the associated obesity. Initially glucose tolerance tests revealed an association between hyperandrogenaemia and hyperinsulinaemia among both obese and non-obese patients in PCOS (Burghen et al., 1980Go; Chang et al., 1983Go). Euglycaemic clamp studies subsequently confirmed profound insulin resistance independent of obesity in PCOS (Dunaif et al., 1989Go) and showed that the insulin resistance was peripheral and did not involve the liver in these patients (Dunaif et al., 1989Go; Peiris et al., 1989Go). More recently in-vitro studies have confirmed a profound reduction in insulin sensitivity in PCOS (Dunaif et al., 1992Go; Ciaraldi et al., 1992Go; Marsden et al., 1994Go). In-vivo studies of insulin action have shown more pronounced abnormalities in amenorrhoeic compared to oligomenorrhoeic women (Kustin et al., 1987Go; Sharp et al., 1991Go; Rittmaster et al., 1993Go; Robinson et al., 1993Go). Whether the reduction in insulin sensitivity is a primary phenomenon or secondary to chronic anovulation remains to be determined.

Patients with hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism (HH) are also chronically anovulatory, albeit with a completely different sex steroid and gonadotrophin profile compared with PCOS. If the insulin resistance in PCOS is indeed a reflection of anovulation then patients with HH should also have a reduction in insulin sensitivity. The present study was therefore designed to investigate the hypothesis that patients with HH are also insulin resistant. The aim was to study insulin sensitivity of adipose tissue in amenorrhoeic patients with HH.


    Materials and methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Subjects
Eight subjects with HH were studied. Of these one subject was found to be diabetic during the investigation and was therefore excluded from the results and calculations. The subjects were recruited from the gynaecological/endocrine clinic and presented either with amenorrhoea or requesting investigation of infertility. All subjects were in good health and were not taking the oral contraceptive pill or any other medication. None of the subjects had a history of or were currently undergoing hard physical training. HH was defined by the clinical features of amenorrhoea, endocrinological parameters including low luteinizing hormone (LH) (<3 IU/l), low follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) (<4 IU/l) and low oestradiol concentrations (<100 pmol/l) and normal ovaries on transvaginal ultrasound. None of the patients were hirsute or had acanthosis nigricans. Testosterone and androstenedione concentration were normal as were thyroid function and prolactin secretion. Clinical and endocrinological parameters are shown in Table IGo. The subjects were studied during a period of amenorrhoea. Subjects were amenorrhoeic for at least 12 weeks prior to the first study (mean ± SEM: 148 ± 51 weeks). Ovarian status was assessed by measuring serum progesterone and oestradiol 1 week prior to and 1 week following the study as well as the study day itself. Vaginal ultrasound was performed on the study day to exclude follicular development. Eight healthy, age and BMI matched women served as controls [mean age: 29.7 ± 2.1 and 29.6 ± 2.3 in HH and control subjects respectively and mean body mass index (BMI): 22.8 ± 1.4 and 22.5 ± 0.67 in HH controls subjects respectively]. None of the controls were hirsute, they all had normal ovulatory function and they were not taking the oral contraceptive pill or any other medication. Morphologically normal ovaries were ascertained by vaginal ultrasound. Physiological variations of insulin binding and insulin action exist within the ovarian cycle (Marsden et al., 1996Go) and therefore the controls were studied in the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle. Serum progesterone estimation was performed in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle preceding the study to confirm an ovulatory cycle.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table I. Clinical and hormone data from individual patients with hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism (HH) and individual control subjects
 
Study protocol
The study was approved by the Joint Ethics Committee of Newcastle upon Tyne District Health Authority. Written informed consent was obtained from each subject before study.

Methods
Subjects and controls were studied between 0800 and 0900 h after an overnight fast. Using an aseptic technique an incision was made (1–2 cm) just below the pubic hair line after s.c. infiltration with 1% lignocaine. Between 3–6 g of s.c. fat was obtained from the lower abdominal wall using dissecting forceps and a scalpel with a number 11 blade. The adipose tissue was then transported to the laboratory in glucose/saline (5 mmol/l glucose/154 mmol/l NaCl) with HEPES 10 mmol/l at 37°C. The adipocyte isolation techniques (Pedersen et al., 1981Go) were used. The adipose tissue was finely chopped and incubated for 90 min at 37°C in a HEPES buffer (pH 7.4), containing human serum albumin (25 g/l) and collagenase (0.5 g/l). The isolated adipocytes were then washed with a HEPES buffer, containing human serum albumin (50 g/l) as previously described (Taylor et al., 1985Go). Tissues and cells were suspended in a HEPES buffer containing the following substance concentrations in mmol/l: NaCl 135, KCl 4.8, MgSO4 1.7, CaCl2 0.5, NaH2PO4 0.2, Na2HPO4 1.0. The pH was adjusted to 7.4 at 37°C. Human serum albumin was present at 50 mg/ml and glucose at 5 mmol/l except for the glucose transport experiments where it was essential that glucose free buffer was used. Cell number and total cell surface area/incubation tube were derived by measuring the diameter of 100 cells and calculating individual cell volume and cell surface area. The mean cell volume and surface area were calculated from the known lipocrit of the cell suspension (Pedersen et al., 1981Go). Venous blood was taken on the day of biopsy for oestradiol, LH, FSH, testosterone, androstenedione, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, intermediate metabolite and non-esterified fatty acids estimation prior to commencing the in-vitro studies of insulin sensitivity. An index of in-vivo insulin sensitivity was derived using the homeostasis model assessment method (HOMA) (Matthews et al., 1985Go).

Glucose transport
Glucose uptake was measured using the method described by Pedersen and Gliemann (1981). Glucose uptake was initiated with direct injection of 14 µl of 3-O-methylglucose (final concentration of 43.3 µmol/l) and the reaction was stopped at 5 s by adding 3 ml 154 mmol/l NaCl containing 0.3 mmol/l of phloretin and 0.2% v/v of ethanol. Silicone oil was layered on the surface and the tubes were spun within 2 min at 3000 g for 90 s. The cell pellets were harvested with a disposable plastic pipette tip and placed in a vial containing 5 ml of scintillation fluid. The trapped extracellular radioactivity was measured by adding 3 ml of saline/phloretin solution before the addition of the glucose and this value was subtracted from all observed values. Glucose transport was expressed as pmol 3-O-methylglucose/10 cm2 cell membrane.

Adipocyte insulin binding
Insulin binding to adipocytes was measured as previously described (Pedersen et al., 1981Go) using A14 labelled mono-[125I] insulin (final concentration of 0.7–10 pmol/l) and insulin (final concentration 1 pmol/l to 100 000 pmol/l) in duplicate incubation. Specific binding was calculated by subtracting the binding observed in the presence of 1.3x10–5 mol/l insulin from the total binding for each insulin concentration. The mean non-specific binding was 5.9% of total cell bound insulin. Binding was expressed as % specific binding/10 cm2 adipocyte surface area. Previous work in this laboratory has demonstrated specific insulin binding to adipocytes from a group of normal women to be 1.78 ± 0.18% (Marsden et al., 1994Go).

Lipolysis inhibition
Lipolysis was measured by incubating 250 µl of 10% cell suspension with either 250 µl of buffer (basal rate) or 200 µl buffer and 50 µl noradrenaline (stimulated rate) or 150 µl buffer, 50 µl noradrenaline and varying concentrations of insulin (10–14 to 10–10 mol/l) for 90 min at 37°C in a shaking waterbath. The medium did not contain caffeine as previously described (Pedersen and Hjollund, 1982Go) and this is likely to account for the observed exquisite sensitivity to insulin. The incubation was terminated with 2 ml of silicone oil and the tubes were centrifuged at 3000 g for 5 min. The silicone oil and the cells were then aspirated with a glass pipette and the infranatant was then stored at –40°C for subsequent assay of glycerol concentration. For glycerol analysis a perchloric acid (PCA) extract was prepared and glycerol was measured using an enzymatic fluorometric continuous-flow assay (Lloyd et al., 1978Go). Lipolysis was expressed as nmol glycerol released by 105 cells/90 min. Results were further calculated as a percentage of maximum stimulated rate of lipolysis, 0% representing basal lipolysis.

Materials
Chemicals
Purified human serum albumin was obtained from Hoechst Behring UK Ltd (Hounslow, Middlesex, UK) (free of growth factors including IGF-I and insulin); collagenase from Clostridium histolyticum (batch No C-6885), phloretin, noradrenaline all from Sigma (London, UK). Crystalline porcine insulin and 125I-mono-iodoinsulin with the labelled iodine in tyrosine A14 were both from Novo Nordisk A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark. 3-O-methyl-D-[U–14C]glucose (specific activity of 126 mCi/mmol) was obtained from Amersham Int. plc (Bucks, UK) and silicone oil 200/50 from Dow Corning Corp. (Poole, Dorset, UK).

Statistics
Statistical analyses were performed using the Student's paired t-test or Mann–Whitney U-test as appropriate. Linear regression analysis was performed to assess correlation between variables. All results are expressed as mean ± SEM unless otherwise indicated.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Maximum insulin receptor binding and action in HH and control subjects is shown in Table IIGo. Data for fasting insulin, glucose, intermediate metabolites and fasting lipids from patients with HH and control subjects are shown in Table IIIGo.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table II. Maximum insulin receptor binding and maximum insulin action in individual patients with HH and individual control subjects
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table III. Intermediate metabolites from individual patients with HH and individual control subjects
 
Adipocyte insulin binding
The insulin binding displacement curve is shown in Figure 1Go. Maximum specific binding was 0.95 ± 0.25% in HH compared with 1.85 ± 0.14% in control subjects per 10 cm2 cell membrane and this difference was significant (P < 0.01). Expression of data as cell number rather than surface area did not affect the conclusions. Receptor affinity as assessed by half maximum displacement by insulin was not significantly different between the two groups (ED50 296 ± 72 pmol/l versus 156 ± 31 pmol/l in HH and controls respectively).



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Specific insulin receptor binding to adipocytes at increasing concentrations of total insulin in hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism (HH) and control subjects. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. • = patients with HH, {circ} = control subjects.

 
Adipocyte glucose uptake
The dose response curve for 3-O-methylglucose transport is shown in Figure 2Go. Basal rates of 3-O-methylglucose uptake were significantly lower in HH compared to control subjects (0.32 ± 0.11 and 0.76 ± 0.11 pmol/l per 10 cm2 cell membrane respectively (P < 0.05). Maximally insulin stimulated rates of 3-O-methylglucose transport were 0.81 ± 0.22 and 1.83 ± 0.20 pmol/l per 10 cm2 membrane in HH and control subjects respectively and this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.01). Half maximal insulin stimulation was observed at 139 ± 62 pmol/l and 30 ± 5 pmol/l in HH and control subjects respectively. Expression of data as cell number rather than surface area did not affect the conclusions.



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Dose response curve for 3-O-methylglucose transport rate in adipocytes in HH and control subjects. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. • = patients with HH, {circ} = control subjects.

 
Regression analysis was used to assess the correlation between maximum rates of glucose transport (pmol 3-O-methylglucose transported/10 cm2 cell surface area) and either adipocyte diameter (µm) or fasting serum insulin concentration (pmol). There was no significant correlation between maximum rates of glucose transport and adipocyte diameter as expected. However there was a weak but significant relationship between maximum rates of glucose uptake and fasting serum insulin concentration (P < 0.05, r = 0.54). Thus the lowest rates of glucose uptake occurred in the HH subjects who had the highest fasting serum insulin concentrations and vice versa: the highest rates of glucose uptake were in the control subjects who had lower concentrations of fasting serum insulin.

Lipolysis inhibition
The maximum percentage lipolysis inhibition observed was 14.92 ± 5.27 in HH and 42.4 ± 8.58 in control subjects and this was significantly different (P < 0.05).

Plasma and metabolite data
The plasma and metabolic data are shown in Table IIIGo. Fasting insulin concentrations were higher in HH compared to controls although this did not reach statistical significance (9.9 ± 3.9 mIU/l and 6.2 ± 1.0 mIU/l respectively. There was no significant difference between fasting glucose, NEFA, pyruvate, lactate, alanine, glycerol and hydroxybuytrate concentrations in HH compared to controls. The mean cholesterol concentrations in HH and control subjects were 5.3 ± 0.3 and 4.6 ± 0.2 mmol/l respectively and this approached statistical significance (P = 0.051). The mean triglyceride concentrations were 1.1 ± 0.2 and 0.7 ± 0.1 mmol/l respectively and this was significantly different (P < 0.05) between the two groups. The mean high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol concentration in HH and control subjects was 1.5 ± 0.1 and 1.7 ± 0.2 mmol/l respectively and this was not significantly different between the two groups. The mean low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentration in HH and control subjects was 3.4 ± 0.3 and 2.5 ± 0.2 mmol/l respectively and this was significantly different (P < 0.05).

In-vivo insulin sensitivity
The in-vivo resistance index using the HOMA method (Matthews et al., 1985Go) showed the HH subjects to be modestly but not significantly more insulin resistant than the control subjects (12.29 ± 6.31 versus 4.93 ± 0.92 respectively) (Table IIIGo).

Endocrine parameters
Endocrine data are shown in Table IGo. The median serum oestradiol concentrations were 70 and 195 pmol/l in patients with HH and control subjects respectively. The progesterone concentrations were all <1 nmol/l in all cases of HH reflecting chronic anovulation. In the control group progesterone concentrations were very low reflecting the early stage of the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle but were slightly higher than the HH group possibly reflecting active ovaries undergoing regular ovulatory cycles and almost certainly a persistent production of progesterone from waning or residual corpus lutea. The median testosterone concentrations in HH and control subjects were 1.2 and 1.3 nmol/l respectively. The mean androstenedione concentrations were 5.5 ± 0.5 and 6.3 ± 0.7 nmol/l respectively and did not differ significantly between the two groups. The expected differences in serum LH and serum FSH were seen between HH and control subjects i.e. LH: 1.5 ± 0.2 and 7.8 ± 2.3 IU/l respectively (P < 0.05), FSH: 1.7 ± 0.3 and 4.0 ± 0.6 IU/l respectively (P = 0.01).


    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
This is the first study investigating insulin sensitivity in HH and shows that patients with HH have markedly reduced insulin receptor binding and a reduction in insulin action compared to control subjects. Whether the reduction in insulin sensitivity demonstrated in these studies is related to chronic anovulation in HH or an association with HH is unclear.

Insulin action and ovarian function appear to be intrinsically linked. There is considerable evidence for insulin insensitivity having an effect on ovarian function. Patients with syndromes of severe insulin resistance with acanthosis nigricans, where a genetic cause for the defect in insulin action is established, are usually hirsute and invariably have large polycystic ovaries suggesting that insulin resistance may cause ovarian dysfunction and alter ovarian morphology (Poretsky and Kalin, 1987Go). Strong evidence for a physiological link between insulin action and ovarian function has come from in-vitro studies. Insulin receptors have been demonstrated on all types of ovarian cells (Poretsky et al., 1985Go) and insulin has been shown to augment oestradiol production from granulosa cells and progesterone production from theca cells (Barbieri et al., 1984Go; Poretsky and Kalin, 1987Go). In-vivo studies have shown patients with PCOS are insulin resistant (Burghen et al., 1980Go; Chang et al., 1983Go; Dunaif et al., 1989Go). A recent in-vitro study of six lean patients with PCOS and eight lean control subjects has confirmed a profound reduction in insulin sensitivity, independent of obesity, with a reduction in insulin receptor binding and a post-receptor defect in insulin action. Maximum adipocyte specific insulin receptor binding was significantly reduced in the patients with PCOS compared to control subjects (0.79 ± 0.17 % for the PCOS group and 1.85 ± 0.14 % for the control subjects per 10 cm2 cell membrane). This difference was highly significant (P < 0.001). Adipocyte insulin stimulated maximum 3-O-methylglucose transport was significantly reduced in subjects with PCOS compared to control subjects [0.86 ± 0.24 and 1.80 ± 0.19 pmol/l per 10 cm2 membrane in PCOS subjects and controls respectively (P = 0.009)]. The ability of insulin to inhibit lipolysis in adipoctyes was impaired in PCOS compared to control subjects [maximum percentage lipolysis inhibition observed was 7.33 ± 2.48% in PCOS and 42.40 ± 8.58% in control subjects (P = 0.006)] (Marsden et al., 1994Go). The only two other in-vitro studies investigating insulin resistance in PCOS at the cellular level (Ciaraldi et al., 1992Go; Dunaif et al., 1992Go) also demonstrated a post-receptor defect in adipocyte insulin sensitivity but did not demonstrate a change in insulin binding. It is noteworthy that both of these studies failed to show a difference in insulin binding between obese and lean normal control subjects or obese and lean PCOS subjects despite large group sizes. All other studies involving examination of the effect of body weight have demonstrated major differences in insulin receptor binding (Olefsky, 1976Go; Kolterman et al., 1979Go; Wigand and Blackard, 1979Go; Pedersen et al., 1981Go) and therefore the results of their insulin binding data must be viewed with caution.

Unlike the aforementioned syndromes of insulin resistance the primary aetiology in PCOS remains undefined. The role of anovulation as an aetiological factor has been proposed since observations of women with PCOS have suggested that associated endocrine abnormalities, such as hyperprolactinaemia (Murdoch et al., 1986Go), raised gonadotrophins and hyperandrogenaemia, improve after ovulation (Baird et al., 1977Go; Blankstein et al., 1987Go). In-vivo studies of insulin action showed more pronounced abnormalities in amenorrhoeic compared to oligomenorrhoeic women (Kustin et al., 1987Go) and more recently in-vivo studies have demonstrated a firm association between reduced insulin sensitivity and anovulatory cycles (Sharp et al., 1991Go; Rittmaster et al., 1993Go; Robinson et al., 1993Go). A recent study from this department using patients as their own controls (studied on two occasions, firstly during amenorrhoea and then again after ovulation) has demonstrated that the marked reduction in insulin sensitivity in PCOS appears to ameliorate after an ovulatory cycle (Marsden et al., 1999Go). Therefore insulin resistance and anovulation appear to be intrinsically linked and anovulation has a modifying effect on insulin sensitivity.

Interestingly the in-vitro studies performed on the patients with HH in the studies presented in this paper demonstrate a degree of insulin resistance similar to the in-vitro studies on lean patients with PCOS. It is tempting to speculate that chronic anovulation may have an aetiological role in the insulin resistance associated with PCOS and HH since both these groups of patients are in a chronic anovulatory state. However the situation is far more complex. Firstly, both groups of patients present with amenorrhoea but they have a completely different hormone and biochemical profile. Patients with PCOS are known to have normal or elevated oestradiol concentrations and raised LH concentrations. Steroid hormones per se are known to affect insulin sensitivity. In pregnancy, where oestrogen and progesterone concentrations are markedly raised, carbohydrate, lipid and intermediary metabolism is altered and insulin sensitivity is impaired (Ryan et al., 1985Go; Stanley et al., 1998Go). Artificially raised concentrations of the sex steroid hormones oestrogen and progesterone found in women taking the combined oral contraceptive pill also affect glucose tolerance and produce a degree of insulin resistance (Kasdorf and Kalkhoff, 1988Go). In addition, in-vitro studies have recently shown a reduction in insulin receptor binding in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle (Marsden et al., 1996Go) suggesting that progesterone produced in the luteal phase may decrease insulin sensitivity. Patients with HH have very low oestradiol concentrations and both patients with PCOS (anovulatory) and HH have low progesterone concentrations. This suggests that if there is a link between anovulation and insulin resistance then it is unlikely to be simply related to circulating sex steroid concentrations.

Secondly as discussed earlier polycystic ovaries are found in conditions of severe insulin resistance with primary genetic causes for the defect in insulin action. This suggests that insulin resistance per se at least modifies ovarian function. The mechanism by which insulin sensitivity is altered by anovulation is likely to involve factors other than sex steroids.

Androstenedione concentrations did not differ between patients with HH and control subjects. This may be considered surprising since androstenedione is considered to be under the regulatory control of LH which was found to be significantly lower in HH subjects compared to controls in this study. However the production of androstenedione is complex and different control mechanisms exist. Androstenedione is predominantly produced by the ovary and although its control is regulated to a degree by LH, local control through growth factors also plays a significant part. In addition androstenedione is also a derivative of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA, produced by the adrenal gland and under the control of adrenocorticotrophic hormone) and the contribution of androstenedione from DHEA in HH is difficult to quantify. Therefore the relationship between LH concentrations and androstenedione concentrations is not clear but the above mechanisms may explain the higher than expected values of androstenedione in these patients.

A significant increase in triglycerides and LDL cholesterol was noted in HH subjects compared to control subjects and although the absolute values in subjects with HH remained in the normal range a trend towards lipid profiles associated with ischaemic heart disease was noted (Bainton et al., 1982Go). This is interesting since abnormal lipid profiles are seen in other conditions associated with insulin resistance (Bavenholm et al., 1995Go). In HH, it remains to be determined to what extent the adverse lipid profile and predisposition to cardiovascular disease is related to hypo-oestrogenaemia and how much to the demonstrated insulin resistance.

In conclusion this study shows that patients with HH appear to have a degree of impaired adipocyte insulin sensitivity similar to that demonstrated in in-vitro studies investigating insulin resistance in amenorrhoeic patients with PCOS. A direct comparison between PCOS and HH was not intended by this paper. However the observations of a reduction in cellular insulin sensitivity in both conditions suggest a consistent direct effect of anovulation on insulin sensitivity.


    Notes
 
4 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Dryburn Hospital, North Road, Durham DH1 5TW, UK. E-mail: philippa_marsden{at}hotmail.com Back


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Bainton, D., Burns-Cox, C.J., Elwood, P.C. et al. (1982) Prevalence of ischaemic heart disease and associations with serum lipoproteins in subjects aged 45 to 64 years. The Speedwell study. Br. Heart J., 47, 483–489.[Abstract]

Baird, D.T., Corker, C.S., Davidson, D.W. et al. (1977) Pituitary-ovarian relationships in polycystic ovary syndrome. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 45, 798–809.[Abstract]

Barbieri, R.L., Makris, A. and Ryan, K.J. (1984) Insulin stimulates androgen accumulation in incubations of human ovarian stroma and theca. Obstet. Gynaecol., 64, 73S–80S.[Medline]

Bavenholm, P., Karpe, F., Proudler, A. et al. (1995) Association of insulin and insulin propeptides with an atherogenic lipoprotein phenotype. Metabolism, 44, 1481–1488.[ISI][Medline]

Blankstein, J., Rabinovici, J., Goldenberg, M. et al. (1987) Changing pituitary reactivity to follicle stimulating hormone and luteinising hormone releasing hormone after induced ovulatory cycles and after anovulation in patients with polycystic ovarian disease. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 65, 1164–1167.[Abstract]

Burghen, G.A., Givens, J.R. and Kitabachi, A.E. (1980) Correlation of hyperandrogenism with hyperinsulinism in polycystic ovarian disease. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 50, 113–116.[Abstract]

Chang, R.J., Nakamura, R.M., Judd, H.L. and Kaplan, S.A. (1983) Insulin resistance in nonobese patients with polycystic ovarian disease. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 57, 356–359.[Abstract]

Ciaraldi, T.P., El-Roeiy, A., Madar, Z. et al. (1992) Cellular mechanisms of insulin resistance in polycystic ovarian syndrome. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 75, 577–583.[Abstract]

Dunaif, A., Segal, K.R., Futterweit, W. and Dobrjansky, A. (1989) Profound peripheral insulin resistance independent of obesity, in polycystic ovary syndrome. Diabetes, 38, 1165–1174.[Abstract]

Dunaif, A., Segal, K.R., Shelley, D.R. et al. (1992) Evidence for distinctive and intrinsic defects in insulin action in polycystic ovary syndrome. Diabetes, 41, 1257–1266.[Abstract]

Kasdorf, G. and Kalkhoff, R.K. (1988) Prospective studies of insulin sensitivity in normal women receiving oral contraceptive agents. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 66, 846–852.[Abstract]

Kolterman, O.G., Reaven, G.M. and Olefsky, J.M. (1979) Relationship between in vitro insulin resistance and decreased insulin receptors in obese man. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 48, 487–494.[ISI][Medline]

Kustin, J., Kazer, R.R., Hoffman, D.I. et al. (1987) Insulin resistance and abnormal ovarian responses to human chorionic gonadotrophin in chronically anovulatory women. Am. J. Obstet. Gynaecol., 157, 1468–1473.[ISI][Medline]

Lloyd, B., Burrin, J., Smythe, P. et al. (1978) Enzymatic fluorometric continuous-flow assays for blood glucose, lactate, pyruvate, alanine, glycerol and hydroxybutyrate. Clin. Chem., 34, 1724–1729.

Matthews, P.J., Hosker J.P., Rudenski A.S. et al. (1985) Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and ß-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man. Diabetologia, 28, 412–419.[ISI][Medline]

Marsden, P.J., Murdoch, A. and Taylor, R. (1994) Severe impairment of insulin action in adipocytes from amenorrhoeic subjects with polycystic ovary syndrome. Metabolism, 43, 1536–1542.[ISI][Medline]

Marsden, P.J., Murdoch, A. and Taylor, R. (1996) Adipocyte insulin action during the normal menstrual cycle. Hum. Reprod., 11, 968–974.[Abstract]

Marsden, P.J., Murdoch, A. and Taylor, R. (1999) Adipocyte insulin action following ovulation in polycystic ovarian syndrome. Hum. Reprod., 14, 2216–2222.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Murdoch, A.P., Dunlop, W. and Kendall-Taylor, P. (1986) Studies of prolactin secretion in polycystic ovary syndrome. Clin. Endocrinol., 24, 165–175.[ISI][Medline]

Olefsky, J.M. (1976) Decreased insulin binding to adipocytes and circulating monocytes from obese subjects. J. Clin. Invest., 57, 1165–1172.[ISI][Medline]

Pedersen, O. and Gliemann, J. (1981) Hexose transport in human adipocytes: factors influencing the response to insulin and kinetics of methylglucose and glucose transport. Diabetologia, 20, 630–635.[ISI][Medline]

Pedersen, O. and Hjollund, E. (1982) Insulin receptor binding to fat and blood cells and insulin action in fat cells from insulin dependent diabetics. Diabetologia, 31, 706–715.

Pedersen, O., Hjollund, E., Beck-Neilsen, H. et al. (1981) Insulin receptor binding and receptor-mediated insulin degradation in human adipocytes. Diabetologia, 20, 636–641.[ISI][Medline]

Peiris, A.N., Aiman, E.J., Druckler, W.D. and Kissebah, A.H. (1989) The relative contribution of hepatic and peripheral tissues to insulin resistance in hyperandrogenic women. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 68, 715–720.[Abstract]

Poretsky, L. and Kalin, M.F. (1987) The gonadotrophic function of insulin. Endocrine Rev., 8, 132–141.[Abstract]

Poretsky, L., Grigorescu, F., Siebel, M. et al. (1985) Distribution and characterisation of insulin and insulin-like growth factor I receptors in normal human ovary. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 61, 728–734.[Abstract]

Rittmaster, R.S., Deshwal, N. and Lehman, L. (1993) The role of adrenal hyperandrogenism, insulin resistance and obesity in the pathogenesis of polycystic ovarian syndrome. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 76, 1295–1300.[Abstract]

Robinson, S., Kiddy, D., Gelding, S.V. et al. (1993) The relationship of insulin insensitivity to menstrual pattern in women with hyperandrogenism and polycystic ovaries. Clin. Endocrinol., 39, 351–355.[ISI][Medline]

Ryan, E.A., O'Sullivan, M.J. and Sykler, J.S. (1985) Insulin action during pregnancy. Studies with the euglycaemic clamp technique. Diabetes, 34, 380–389.[Abstract]

Sharp, P.S., Kiddy, D.S., Reed, M.J. et al. (1991) Correlation of plasma insulin and insulin-like growth factor-I with indices of androgen transport and metabolism in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Clin. Endocrinol., 35, 253–257.[ISI][Medline]

Stanley, K., Fraser, R. and Bruce, C. (1998) Physiological changes in insulin resistance in human pregnancy: longitudinal study with the hyperinsulinaemic euglycaemic clamp technique. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol., 105, 756–759.[ISI][Medline]

Taylor, R., McCulloch, A.J., Zeuzem, S. et al. (1985) Insulin secretion, adipocyte insulin binding and insulin sensitivity in thyrotoxicosis. Acta Endocrinol., 109, 96–103.[Medline]

Wigand, J.P. and Blackard, W.G. (1979) Down regulation of insulin receptors in obese man. Diabetes, 28, 287–291.[Abstract]

Submitted on January 12, 2000; accepted on May 4, 2000.





This Article
Abstract
FREE Full Text (PDF )
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Add to My Personal Archive
Download to citation manager
Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Articles by Marsden, P. J.
Articles by Taylor, R.
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by Marsden, P. J.
Articles by Taylor, R.