AJP - Regu Add DOIs to your references at manuscript stage!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol (November 19, 2008). doi:10.1152/ajpregu.90410.2008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
296/1/R43    most recent
90410.2008v1
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 Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lo, C.-M.
Right arrow Articles by Tso, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lo, C.-M.
Right arrow Articles by Tso, P.
Submitted on May 7, 2008
Revised on October 31, 2008
Accepted on November 17, 2008

Effect of intraperitoneal and intravenous administration of cholecystokinin-8 and apolipoprotein AIV on intestinal lymphatic CCK-8 and apo AIV concentration

Chun-Min Lo1, Min Xu1, Qing Yang1, Shuqin Zheng, Katherine M Carey1, Matthew R Tubb1, William Sean Davidson1, Min Liu1, Stephen C. Woods2, and Patrick Tso2*

1 University of Cincinnati
2 University of Cincinnati Medical Center

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: tsopp{at}email.uc.edu.

Cholecystokinin (CCK) and apolipoprotein AIV (apo AIV) are gastrointestinal satiety signals whose synthesis and secretion by the gut are stimulated by fat absorption. Intraperitoneally administered CCK-8 is more potent in suppressing food intake than a similar dose administered intravenously, but the reason for this disparity is unclear. In contrast, both intravenous and intraperitoneally administered apo AIV are equally as potent in inhibiting food intake. When we compared the lymphatic concentration of CCK-8 and apo AIV, we found that neither intraperitoneally nor intravenously administered CCK-8 or apo AIV altered lymphatic flow rate. Interestingly, intraperitoneal administration of CCK-8 produced a significantly higher lymphatic concentration at 15 min than did intravenous administration. Intraperitoneal injection of apo AIV also yielded a higher lymphatic concentration at 30 min than did intravenous administration. Intraperitoneal administration of CCK-8 and apo AIV also resulted in a much longer period of elevated CCK-8 and apo AIV peptide concentration in lymph than intravenous administration. Furthermore, enzymatic activity of dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPPIV) and aminopeptidase was higher in plasma than in lymph during fasting, and so, satiation peptides such as CCK-8 and apo AIV in the lymph are protected from degradation by the significantly lower DPP-IV and aminopeptidase activity levels in lymph than in plasma. Therefore, the higher potency of intraperitoneally administered CCK-8 as compared to intravenously administered CCK-8 in inhibiting food intake may be explained by both its higher concentration in lymph as well as the prolonged duration of its presence in the lamina propria.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the American Physiological Society.