Analysis of glucagon-like peptide 1; what to measure?

Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) is a gut hormone which acts as an incretin and is therefore of major interest in treatment of type II diabetes mellitus. GLP-1 circulates in many different forms, some of which are biologically active and others are not. Our hypothesis was that various methods to meas...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inClinica chimica acta Vol. 412; no. 13; pp. 1191 - 1194
Main Authors Heijboer, Annemieke C., Frans, Anneke, Lomecky, Marie, Blankenstein, Marinus A.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Netherlands Elsevier B.V 11.06.2011
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) is a gut hormone which acts as an incretin and is therefore of major interest in treatment of type II diabetes mellitus. GLP-1 circulates in many different forms, some of which are biologically active and others are not. Our hypothesis was that various methods to measure GLP-1 detect different forms of GLP-1, which may cause confusion when comparing results. We compared three assays, the GLP-1 (active) ELISA (Linco research; ELISA LINCO), GLP-1 (total) RIA (Linco research; RIA LINCO) and the total GLP-1 RIA developed by the group of Holst (RIA HOLST) on specimens obtained during meal studies. In addition, we studied the effect of addition of a DPP-4 inhibitor. The correlation between RIA LINCO and ELISA LINCO was highest (r = 0.76; n = 35; p < 0.01), whereas results of RIA HOLST correlated less with those of RIA LINCO and ELISA LINCO (r = 0.35 and 0.39 respectively; n = 35; p < 0.05). GLP-1 results measured with ELISA LINCO were higher (median 28%; p < 0.001) upon addition of the DPP-4 inhibitor. Two commercially available GLP-1 assays do not necessarily give results equal to the well-defined GLP-1 assay developed in Copenhagen. Absolute values are also different due to differences in standardisation. Moreover, assays detect different forms of GLP-1, which hampers comparison to published data.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0009-8981
1873-3492
1873-3492
DOI:10.1016/j.cca.2011.03.010