English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The present study tests the mechanistic postulate that estrogen confers resistance to negative feedback by systemic IGF-I. To this end, eight postmenopausal women received a constant iv infusion of recombinant human (rh)IGF-I (10 micro g/kg.h x 6 h) and saline in randomized order on the 10th day of supplementation with oral estradiol (E(2)) and placebo (Pl). GH secretion was quantitated by 10-min blood sampling, immunochemiluminometry assay, and deconvolution analysis. Administration of E(2) compared with Pl followed by saline infusion: 1) stimulated pulsatile GH secretion ( micro g/liter.6 h), viz., 12 +/- 3.3 (Pl) and 18 +/- 4.6 (E(2)) (mean +/- SEM, paired comparison, P &lt; 0.05); 2) halved the time latency (min) to achieve peak GH secretion after GHRH injection, 24 +/- 2.2 (Pl) and 12 +/- 2.1 (E(2)) (P &lt; 0.01); and 3) did not alter the mass of GH secreted ( micro g/liter) in response to a maximally effective dose of GHRH, 30 +/- 7.2 (Pl) and 37 +/- 11 (E(2)). Exposure to E(2) compared with Pl followed by rhIGF-I infusion: 1) accelerated the rate of decline of GH concentrations by 3.3-fold, viz., absolute slope ( micro g/liter.1000 min), 3.8 (range, 2.5-5.0) (Pl) and 12 (range, 10-14) (E(2)) (P &lt; 0.001); 2) augmented the algebraic decrement in GH concentrations ( micro g/liter) enforced by rhIGF-I infusion, 0.73 +/- 0.21 (Pl) and 1.6 +/- 0.25 (E(2)) (P &lt; 0.01); 3) halved the time delay (min) to peak GHRH-induced GH secretion, 20 +/- 1.2 (Pl) vs. 10 +/- 1.3 (E(2)) min (P &lt; 0.01). In contradistinction, E(2) did not alter: 1) the capability of rhIGF-I to suppress GHRH-stimulated GH secretory burst mass significantly, viz., by 50 +/- 8% (Pl) and 52 +/- 14% (E(2)) (P &lt; 0.05 each vs. saline); 2) the hourly rate of rise of infused (total) IGF-I concentrations; and 3) total and ultrafiltratably free IGF-I concentrations ( micro g/liter) attained at the end of the two rhIGF-I infusions. In summary, compared with Pl, E(2) supplementation in postmenopausal women: 1) amplifies endogenously driven GH secretory-burst mass; 2) initiates rapid onset of GHRH-stimulated GH release; and 3) potentiates IGF-I-dependent suppression of unstimulated GH concentrations. Based upon companion modeling data, we postulate that E(2) facilitates the upstroke and IGF-I enforces the downstroke of high-amplitude GH secretory bursts in estrogen-replete individuals.

the journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism/journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism

Estradiol Supplementation Modulates Growth Hormone (GH) Secretory-Burst Waveform and Recombinant Human Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I-Enforced Suppression of Endogenously Driven GH Release in Postmenopausal Women