help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrinology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH

This version published online on June 12, 2003
Endocrinology, doi:10.1210/en.2002-0123
A more recent version of this article appeared on September 1, 2003
This Article
Right arrow Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
144/9/3950    most recent
Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kasukawa, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Mohan, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kasukawa, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Mohan, S.

Submitted on December 9, 2002
Accepted on May 20, 2003

EVIDENCE THAT SENSITIVITY TO GROWTH HORMONE (GH) IS GROWTH PERIOD AND TISSUE TYPE-DEPENDENT: STUDIES IN GH DEFICIENT LIT/LIT MICE

Yuji Kasukawa1, David J. Baylink1, Rongqing Guo1, and Subburaman Mohan1*

1 Musculoskeletal Disease Center, JL Pettis VA Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA 92357, USA; Department of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350; Department of Biochemistry, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350; Department of Physiology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mohans{at}lom.med.va.gov.

We previously found that the magnitude of skeletal deficits caused by growth hormone (GH) deficiency varied during different growth periods. To test the hypothesis that the sensitivity to GH is growth period dependent, we treated GH-deficient lit/lit mice with GH (4 mg/kg body wt./day) or vehicle during the prepubertal and pubertal (days 7-34), pubertal (23-34), post-pubertal (42-55) and adult (day 204-217) periods and evaluated GH effects on the musculoskeletal system by DEXA and pQCT. GH treatment during different periods significantly increased total body bone mineral content (BMC), bone mineral density (BMD), bone area and lean body mass [LBM] and decreased % fat compared with vehicle, however, the magnitude of change varied markedly depending on the treatment period. For example, the increase in total body BMD was significantly (P < 0.01) greater when GH was administered between days 42-55 (15%) compared with pubertal (8%) or adult (7.7%) periods while the net loss in % body fat was greatest (-56%) when GH was administered between days 204-216 and least (-27%) when GH was administered between days 7-35. To determine if GH-induced anabolic effects on the musculoskeletal system are maintained after GH withdrawal, we performed DEXA measurements 3-7 weeks after stopping GH treatment. The increases in total body BMC, BMD and LBM, but not the decrease in body fat, were sustained after GH withdrawal. Our findings demonstrate that the sensitivity to GH in target tissues is growth period and tissue type-dependent and that continuous GH-treatment is necessary to maintain body fat loss but not BMD gain during a 3-7 week follow-up.


Key words: Growth Hormone • lit/lit mice • bone • bone density • lean body mass • fat • puberty







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals
Copyright © 2003 by The Endocrine Society