PDA

View Full Version : i wish it did but IGF DOES NOT cause skeletal muscle cell hyperplasia



hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-23-2013, 12:10 PM
I would like to post some information in regards to what I have seen in many forums about the effect of igf on adult skeletal muscle tissue. i haven't been online in awhile b/c i'm so busy with clinical rotations but today the first article i read in the peptide section dealt with peptides and their role in the human body. For the most part the article did a decent job of explaining substantially complex biochemical pathways in basic terms. There was one part of the post that I must address however and that is the claim that igf can in fact induce adult skeletal muscle tissue hyperplasia. for those new to biochemistry and physiology, the term hyperplasia means in an increase in the existing number of whereas hypertrophy refers to an increase in the size of. The debate is to whether or not igf can in fact increase the number of muscle cells in an adult human being. Sadly this has yet to be proven with scientifically backed evidence based research and publication. talk to any endocrinologist who went to undergrad 4 years, med school 4 years and then 3-5 years of residency and you will not find one that will say that igf can cause adult skeletal muscle tissue cell hyperplasia. i am not an endocrinologist but i will be working in family practice and then moonlighting in the emergency room a few times a month when i am finally done. that being said, i have a vested interest in the endocrine system and its affect on exercise and muscle growth so to those that do not trust what i am saying here, i encourage you to go buy some medical textbooks regarding physiology and the endocrine system and do research yourself. I will state that all that can be demonstrated is that igf can increase the number of cells incorporated into a myotube thus inducing hypertrophy or an increase in the actual size of a myotube. For those who are wondering what a myotube is, a myotube is a skeletal muscle fiber. There is no evidence as of yet or scientific proof to indicate that igf can increase the number of myotubes in adult human beings. I will post down below some resources for those who would like to delve further into this topic.

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-23-2013, 12:16 PM
J Physiol. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16081485) 2005 Oct 1;568(Pt 1):229-42. Epub 2005 Aug 4.
Isolation and validation of human prepubertal skeletal muscle cells: maturation and metabolic effects of IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and TNFalpha.
Grohmann M (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Grohmann%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16081485), Foulstone E (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Foulstone%20E%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16081485), Welsh G (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Welsh%20G%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16081485), Holly J (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Holly%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16081485), Shield J (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Shield%20J%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16081485), Crowne E (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Crowne%20E%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16081485), Stewart C (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Stewart%20C%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=16081485).


The impact of IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and TNFα on skeletal muscle differentiation was also examined. Both IGF-I and its analogue LR3 elicited comparable increases in myotube hypertrophy, protein content, and CK activity over controls, with the greatest difference observed at day 3. The augmented differentiation by IGF-I was concomitant with an increase in myoblast hyperplasia and myoblast incorporation into each myotube fibre; however, the percentage of myotubes formed was unaffected. We suggest that IGF-I is implicated in enhanced myoblast fusion (facilitated by an increase in myoblast number), which may in turn drive a more rapid differentiation process, in part by up-regulating myogenin protein expression (Quinn et al. 1993 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-33)). These findings are supported in animal (Mitchell et al. 2002 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-30)) and adult human investigations (Foulstone et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-18)).



Isolation and validation of human prepubertal skeletal muscle cells: maturation and metabolic effects of IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and TNFα


Malcolm Grohmann (http://jp.physoc.org/search?author1=Malcolm+Grohmann&sortspec=date&submit=Submit) 1 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#target-1),
Emily Foulstone (http://jp.physoc.org/search?author1=Emily+Foulstone&sortspec=date&submit=Submit) 1 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#target-1),
Gavin Welsh (http://jp.physoc.org/search?author1=Gavin+Welsh&sortspec=date&submit=Submit) 3 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#target-3),
Jeff Holly (http://jp.physoc.org/search?author1=Jeff+Holly&sortspec=date&submit=Submit) 1 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#target-1),
Julian Shield (http://jp.physoc.org/search?author1=Julian+Shield&sortspec=date&submit=Submit) 2 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#target-2),
Elizabeth Crowne (http://jp.physoc.org/search?author1=Elizabeth+Crowne&sortspec=date&submit=Submit) 2 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#target-2)and
Claire Stewart (http://jp.physoc.org/search?author1=Claire+Stewart&sortspec=date&submit=Submit) 4 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#target-4)

+ (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full) Author Affiliations


1Department of Surgery, University of Bristol, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Upper Maudlin Street, Bristol, UK 2Department of Paediatric Endocrinology, Institute of Child Health, Royal Hospital for Children, Upper Maudlin Street, Bristol, UK 3Department of Biochemistry, University of Bristol, University Walk, Bristol, UK 4Department of Exercise and Sport Science, Manchester Metropolitan University, Hassall Road, Alsager, UK



Corresponding author
C. Stewart: Department of Exercise and Sport Science, Manchester Metropolitan University, Hassall Road, Alsager, UK. Email: [email protected] ([email protected])


Next Section (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#sec-1)
Abstract
We have developed a primary skeletal muscle cell culture model derived from normal prepubertal children to investigate the effects of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) and tumour necrosis factor α (TNFα) on growth, differentiation and metabolism. Cells of myoblast lineage were characterized morphologically by desmin staining and differentiated successfully into multinucleated myotubes. Differentiation was confirmed biochemically by an increase in creatine kinase (CK) activity and IGFBP-3 secretion over time. IGF-I promoted whilst TNFα inhibited myoblast proliferation, differentiation and IGFBP-3 secretion. IGF-I partially rescued the cells from the inhibiting effects of TNFα. Compared to adult myoblast cultures, children's skeletal muscle cells demonstrated higher basal and day 7 CK activities, increased levels of IGFBP-3 secretion, diminished IGF-I/TNFα action and absence of the inhibitory effect of exogenous IGFBP-3 on differentiation. Additional studies demonstrated that TNFα increased basal glucose transport via GLUT1, nitric oxide synthase and p38MAPK-dependent mechanisms. These studies provide baseline data to study the interactivity effects of growth factors and cytokines on differentiation and metabolism in muscle in relation to important metabolic disorders such as obesity, type II diabetes or chronic wasting diseases.
Mechanisms of skeletal muscle maintenance and metabolism have been extensively studied in models of disease states from cachexia (Espat et al. 1994 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-12)) to obesity-related insulin resistance (Schmitz-Peiffer, 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-40)). Most of the in vitro studies to date have utilized immortalized rat and mouse skeletal muscle cell lines (Roeder et al. 1988 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-35); Stewart & Rotwein, 1996a (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-42)), but more recently primary cell cultures from adult humans have been established, revealing important actions of insulin-like growth factor (IGF) I and II and their binding proteins, as well as cytokines such as tumour necrosis factor α (TNFα) on myoblast survival, proliferation and differentiation (Foulstone et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-18)). The central importance of the IGFs to muscle growth and development has also been demonstrated using ‘knock-out’ studies in mice, which leads to impaired embryonic development, especially in skeletal muscle (Wood, 1995 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-49)). Conversely, over-expression of IGF-I has led to elevated bone and muscle growth in transgenic mice (Mathews et al. 1988 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-27); Coleman et al. 1995 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-6)), as well as increased myogenin mRNA, a transcription factor directly associated with terminal myogenic differentiation (Florini et al. 1991 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-16)). Over-expression of IGF-II, on the other hand, has minimal growth promoting effects in vivo (Rogler et al. 1994 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-36)), but appears to act as a survival factor in culture by minimizing cell death during the transition from proliferating to differentiating myoblasts (Stewart & Rotwein, 1996b (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-43)).
The availability of biologically active IGFs is mainly controlled by the IGF binding proteins (IGFBPs), which have high binding affinity for IGF-I and IGF-II and once bound, block IGF receptor activation. They function not only as carrier proteins for the IGFs in the circulation, but also serve to maintain a circulating reservoir of these ligands (Firth & Baxter, 2002 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-14)). The inhibitory effects of IGFBPs have been demonstrated using IGF analogues such as des-(1–3)IGF-I or [Arg3]IGF-I (LR3), produced by truncation or mutation of key residues in the amino terminus of IGF, resulting in reduced affinity toward the IGFBPs, while maintaining normal affinity for the IGF-I receptor (IGFIR) (Forbes et al. 1988 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-17); Tomas et al. 1993 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-46)). In contrast to the cell lines, primary adult skeletal muscle cell cultures express and secrete large quantities of endogenous IGFBP-3 (Crown et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-9)), shown to reduce myoblast differentiation (Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)).
In addition to the IGFs and their binding proteins, pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNFα have also been implicated in aetiology of skeletal muscle growth and degeneration, impacting on muscle wasting (Giordano et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-20)), insulin resistance (Saghizadeh et al. 1996 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-38)) and inhibition of differentiation in both murine and adult skeletal muscle cultures (Meadows et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-29); Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)). While muscle is the main determinant of in vivo glucose disposal (DeFronzo et al. 1981 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-10)), there is mixed literature concerning the effects of TNFα on glucose homeostasis, showing inhibitory (Lang et al. 1992 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-26)), stimulatory (Ciaraldi et al. 1998 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-5)) or no impact (Nolte et al. 1998 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-32)) on glucose transport in muscle.
The IGF axis and TNFα system play a major role in controlling growth and differentiation of skeletal muscle in adults, but such findings cannot necessarily be extrapolated to children. Since little or no data exist in prepubertal children, we have focused initially on skeletal muscle derived from this population, to avoid the additional variables associated with inherent changes in insulin sensitivity in puberty, due to augmentation of the growth hormone (GH)–IGF axis and the effects of sex steroids. To this end we have developed an in vitro primary skeletal muscle cell culture model derived from prepubertal children to investigate the actions of IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and TNFα on cellular growth, differentiation and metabolism. Using this model we have demonstrated both similarities and differences in the behaviour of skeletal myoblasts derived from children when compared to adult cultures, and add further data to the increasing knowledge of the effects of TNFα on glucose utilization in this clinically relevant model.
Previous Section (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#abstract-1)Next Section (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#sec-13)
Methods
Patient data
Skeletal muscle biopsies were taken from the anterior abdominal wall of 14 prepubertal Caucasian children at the onset of routine elective abdominal surgery at the Royal Hospital for Children in Bristol. Patients underwent either pyeloplasty or nephrectomy operations (9 male/5 female), median (range) age was 4.4 (0.9–9) years, median (range) body mass index standard deviation score (BMI SDS) was −0.1 (−2.31 to +1.16). All patients had normal blood pressure and fasting insulin levels (median (range) 1.5 (1–4.0) mU l−1) and displayed normal systemic insulin sensitivity using QUICKI (Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index) (Uwaifo et al. 2002 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-47)) (median (range) 0.47 (0.39–0.54)). Adult biopsies (2 male/2 female), median (range) age 37 (35.5–40.5) years, were taken from the anterior abdominal wall of patients with normal BMI undergoing benign upper gastro-intestinal operations. No patients had sepsis, malignant or endocrine conditions. The study was approved by the United Bristol Healthcare Trust Ethics Committee, and written informed consent was obtained from parent or guardian.
Reagents
Tissue culture plasticware was obtained from Greiner Bio-one (Kremsmunster, Austria). Fetal bovine serum (FBS), Ham's F-10 medium and trypsin–EDTA were obtained from Gibco Invitrogen (Paisley, UK). Streptomycin and penicillin were obtained from the local hospital pharmacy. Human recombinant insulin was obtained from Novo Nordisk (Bagsverd, Denmark) and human recombinant TNFα from Bachem (St Helens, UK). Phosphate buffered saline (PBS) was obtained from Oxoid (Basingstoke, UK). Recombinant human IGF-I and LR3 IGF-I (an analogue of IGF-I with greatly reduced affinity for the IGFBPs) were purchased from Gropep (Adelaide, Australia). Recombinant human non-glycosylated IGFBP-3 was kindly donated by C. Maack (Celtrix, CA, USA). Antibodies to desmin (clone D33) and StrepABComplex/HRP were obtained from Dako (Glostrup, Denmark). Antibodies to GPDH were purchased from Chemicon (CA, USA). In-house antibodies to human IGFBP-3 were raised against rabbit. GLUT4 antibodies (400064) were purchased from Calbiochem (CA, USA) and GLUT1 antibodies were kindly donated by Geoff Holman (University of Bath, UK). 125Iodine, 2-deoxy-d-[3H]glucose, nitrocellulose and enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL) Western blot detection kits were purchased from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech (Buckinghamshire, UK), BCA protein assay and supersignal West-Dura chemiluminescence reagents were purchased from Pierce (Rockford, IL, USA). All other chemicals and reagents unless otherwise stated were purchased from Sigma (Poole, UK).
Isolation and culture of skeletal muscle myoblasts
The isolation of skeletal muscle myoblasts was performed as previously described (Crown et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-9)). Tissue samples (0.2–0.5 g) were collected under sterile conditions at the onset of surgery. The biopsies were washed in PBS, cut into 1 mm3 pieces, and digested in 10 ml 0.05% trypsin−0.02% EDTA in PBS for 15 min with gentle mixing at 37°C. The supernatant was removed and added to 2 ml heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (hiFBS) before centrifugation at 80 g for 4 min. The pellet was resuspended in 3 ml Ham's F10 growth medium, supplemented with 20% hiFBS, 2 mm l-glutamine, 100 U ml−1 penicillin and 0.1 mg ml−1 streptomycin. This process was repeated a further two times and the cell suspensions pooled and seeded onto a 75 cm2 0.2% gelatin coated tissue culture flask. Cells were maintained at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 and 95% air, and medium was changed every 72 h until 80–90% confluency was attained. All experiments were performed on cells at passages 3–5 of their growth kinetics to ensure consistency.
Proliferation assay
Cells were seeded in 24-well plates at 7000 cells cm−2 and cultured in Ham's F10 medium supplemented with 20% FBS. Proliferation was assessed over time at days 1, 3, 6, 8 and 10 post-plating. At each time point cells were washed twice in PBS and either trypsinized and counted by trypan blue exclusion or analysed by 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide; thiazoyl blue (MTT) assay. The MTT assay was initiated by incubation of cells with 500 μl fresh growth medium and 125 μl of MTT stock solution at 2 mg ml−1 in PBS (final concentration 0.4 mg ml−1) for 4 h at 37°C. The MTT medium was aspirated and the accumulated purple formazan dissolved in 150 μl PBS and 750 μl DMSO per well for 5 min. The absorbance of the solution obtained was analysed at 570 nm with background subtraction at 690 nm. Empty wells were similarly treated and used as blanks. All experiments were performed before confluency and hence before contact inhibition occurred.
Differentiation of skeletal muscle myoblasts
Skeletal myoblasts were inoculated into 0.2% gelatin coated six-well plates at a density of 18 000 cells cm−2 and following a 16-h period of cell attachment in growth medium, were washed twice in PBS and induced to differentiate over a 7-day period in low serum medium (LSM) (minimal essential medium (MEM) supplemented with 2% hiFBS, 2 mm l-glutamine, 100 U ml−1 penicillin, and 0.1 mg ml−1 streptomycin). Differentiation was manipulated with a single dose of 50 ng ml−1 IGF-I, 50 ng ml−1 LR3, 150–300 ng ml−1 IGFBP-3 or 20 ng ml−1 TNFα upon transfer to LSM.
Characterization of differentiated skeletal muscle myoblasts
Immunoctyochemical characterization was carried out on cells grown on 35 mm dishes. Myoblasts were identified using antibodies to desmin at a dilution of 1: 100 followed by specific biotinylated secondary antibodies and a StreptAvidin biotinylated horseradish peroxidase (StrepABComplex/HRP) coupled with 3,3′-diamino benzidine (DAB). Nuclei were counterstained with haematoxylin. Cells were imaged using an Olympus BX40 light microscope (Olympus America Inc., NY, USA). Image acquisitions were calibrated with a 1 mm objective micrometer and were controlled and analysed using Image Pro Plus 4.0 software from Media Cybernetics (Silver Spring, MD, USA). Analysis of the average number of cells per field of view, the percentage of positively stained myoblasts/myotubes and the number of nuclei per myotube were calculated from six random fields of view (× 200), for each treatment, from 12 individuals.
Differentiation was characterized biochemically by measuring creatine kinase (CK) activity. Following treatment, cells were washed twice with PBS, scraped and lysed in 60 μl of Tris–Mes–Triton (50 mm Tris-Mes, 1% Triton X-100, pH 7.8) and stored at −80°C. Samples were assayed within 14 days of collection using a commercially available kit (Sigma CK-20) following the manufacturer's instructions. Enzymatic activity was normalized to total protein content as determined by the bicinchonic acid (BCA™) protein assay.
IGFBP-3 production and secretion were determined by western ligand and immunoblotting, described below, and additionally by an in-house radioimmunoassay (RIA) (Yateman et al. 1993 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-51)), using an in-house antiserum (Hughes et al. 1995 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-25)) at a final dilution of 1: 20 000 (interassay percentage CV5.1). IGF-I and IGF-II secretion were also analysed by RIA as previously described (Bowsher et al. 1991 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-4)).
Isolation of cellular proteins and membranes
Following differentiation, conditioned media were removed and stored at −20°C and cell lysates were prepared. After washing cells in ice-cold PBS, total cellular proteins were extracted by scraping into ice-cold lysis buffer (10 mm Tris-Cl pH 7.6, 5 mm EDTA, 50 mm NaCl, 30 mm sodium pyrophosphate, 50 mm sodium fluoride, 100 μm sodium orthovanadate, 1% Triton X-100, and 1 mm phenylmethylsulphonylfluoride (added just prior to use), also supplemented with protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktails). Lysates were cleared of insoluble material by centrifugation at 2000 g for 5 min at 4°C. Protein concentrations were quantified using the BCA protein assay. Protein extracts were used immediately or aliquoted and stored at −20°C. Total membranes were prepared from cell lysates by homogenization using a Wheaton A (tight fit) glass homogenizer (60 strokes), followed by centrifugation at 2000 g for 15 min at 4°C. The resulting supernatant was centrifuged at 190 000 g for 60 min at 4°C producing a total membrane pellet. The membranes were resuspended in ice-cold lysis buffer and the protein content determined.
Western immuno- and ligand blotting
Conditioned media (80 μl), whole cell extracts and membrane fractions (50 μg sample−1) were separated by 12.5% sodium dodecyl-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) under non-reducing conditions (IGFBP analysis) or reducing conditions for GLUT1/4 detection. Following electrophoretic transfer of the proteins to nitrocellulose, non-specific binding sites were blocked with 3% bovine serum albumin (BSA) (IGFBP-3) or 5% non-fat dry milk (GLUT1 and GLUT4) in Tris-buffered saline (TBS; 10 mm Tris-HCl, pH 7.8, 150 mm NaCl), 0.1% Tween 20 (TBS-T) for 1–2 h at room temperature. Ligand blots were probed with a radiolabelled mixture of IGF-I and IGF-II in 50 mm Tris-Cl–3% BSA and visualized by autoradiography. Immunoblots were incubated overnight at 4°C with primary antihuman IGFBP-3 antibodies (1: 5000) or with GLUT1 and GLUT4 antibodies (1: 1000) in the appropriate blocking buffer. Following washing and incubation with horseradish-peroxidase conjugated secondary antibodies (1: 10 000), the proteins were detected by enhanced chemiluminescence after exposure to Kodak X-Omat LS film. Differences in protein abundance were quantified by densitometry using a scanning densitometer and analysed using Molecular Analyst software (Bio-Rad laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA), in addition to re-probing for the housekeeping protein GPDH. Data are expressed in arbitrary optical density units.
Immunocytochemical analysis of GLUT1 expression
Differentiating skeletal myoblasts were exposed to 20 ng ml−1 TNFα for the last 24 h of differentiation. Cells were washed twice in PBS, fixed in 2% paraformaldehyde and blocked in 1.5% goat serum in PBS. Antibodies to GLUT1 were used at a dilution of 1: 100, followed by specific biotinylated secondary antibodies with StrepABComplex/HRP and DAB detection. Nuclei were counterstained with haematoxylin and the cells imaged using an Olympus BX40 light microscope.
Glucose transport in differentiated skeletal muscle
Skeletal myoblasts were differentiated as described and for the last 24 h of differentiation exposed to 20 ng ml−1 TNFα. 2-Deoxy-d-[3H]glucose uptake was determined as a measure of the glucose transport system as previously described (Fletcher et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-15)). Results are expressed as percentage stimulation above basal to correct for interindividual variation in basal glucose transport rates.
Statistics
The data were subjected to Student's t test, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Pearson correlation coefficients using SPSS (version 11.5) (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA). Results were expressed as the mean ± s.e.m. A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered to be significant.
(http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#sec-1) (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#sec-21)

Results
Characterization of primary skeletal muscle cultures
Myoblasts derived from the small number of satellite cells present in the original muscle biopsies (Mauro, 1961 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-28); Moss & Leblond, 1971 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-31)) were successfully cultured from all subjects. Since the cultures are not homogeneous populations, the myoblasts were identified using an antibody to the muscle-specific protein desmin. Figure 1A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F1) is a representative view of primary skeletal muscle cells in culture, typically comprising 57 ± 3% myoblasts; the remaining cell population is predominantly composed of muscle-derived fibroblasts. The percentage did not change with subculturing or under normal differentiating conditions (data not shown). Cellular proliferation was assessed over time by manual cell counting and MTT analysis, demonstrating a cell doubling time of 44 ± 4 h and 50 ± 4 h, respectively. All cultures formed multinucleated myotubes when induced to differentiate for 7 days in low serum medium (LSM) (Fig. 1A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F1)). Differentiation was also assessed biochemically by measuring the activity of the muscle-specific enzyme creatine kinase (CK) at day 0, before placing the cells into LSM and at subsequent time points during the differentiation procedure. Maximal differentiation was attained after 7 days in LSM revealing a mean CK activity of 2293 ± 307 mU (mg protein)−1 (Fig. 1B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F1)). ANOVA revealed a highly significant interaction between CK activity and time (P < 0.001). Prolonged differentiation (up to 14 days) did not increase either myotube formation or CK activity above that seen at day 7 (data not shown). Since adult skeletal muscle cultures produce large amounts of intact IGFBP-3 (Crown et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-9)), we wished to establish if our cells were also capable of secreting this protein. Children's skeletal myoblasts do indeed secrete IGFBP-3 into the medium, as shown by radioimmunoassay (RIA) (Fig. 1B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F1)). Change in IGFBP-3 levels was highly significant with time (P < 0.001) and correlated significantly with CK activity (r = 0.83, P < 0.001) under differentiating conditions. The average concentration in day 7 conditioned medium was 290 ± 25 ng ml−1, equating to 346 ± 49 ng (mg protein)−1. Interestingly, when analysed by Western immunoblotting, IGFBP-3 showed evidence of proteolysis with increasing fragmentation over time (Fig. 1C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F1)). Further analysis of day 7 myotube conditioned medium by RIA for IGF-I and IGF-II showed no significant production of endogenous IGF-I. However, low levels of IGF-II were detectable, 10.2 ± 1.4 ng ml−1.

Figure 1. 
Differentiation of children's skeletal muscle myoblasts
A, cells were characterized pre- and post-differentiation using antibodies to the muscle-specific protein desmin. Upper panel, myoblasts at day 0; lower panel, myotubes after 7 days of differentiation. Representative micrographs are shown. Scale bar = 100 μm. B, CK activity (filled bars) and IGFBP-3 secretion (open bars) were determined from cell lysates and conditioned medium, respectively, at days 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 of differentiation. The data represent the mean CK activity and mean IGFBP-3 concentration ± s.e.m. from 14 individuals. C, representative IGFBP-3 Western immunoblot demonstrating IGFBP-3 secretion throughout differentiation.
Effect of IGF-I, LR3, IGFBP-3 and TNFα on myotube formation and CK activity
After characterization of the cell culture model, we next investigated whether differentiation could be manipulated using growth factors and cytokines that have been implicated in skeletal muscle maintenance and metabolism. Both IGF-I and LR3 (50 ng ml−1) enhanced differentiation over day 7 controls, by increasing the size of the myotubes formed, whereas 150 ng ml−1 IGFBP-3 was without effect (Fig. 2A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F2)). Conversely, 20 ng ml−1 TNFα inhibited myotube formation when compared to day 7 LSM control (Fig. 2A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F2)). When differentiation was analysed biochemically the largest impact of growth factors was evident at day 3, for both IGF-I and LR3. Data revealed a 142 ± 50% (P = 0.002) and 157 ± 51% (P = 0.02) increase in CK activity versus day 3 control, respectively (Fig. 2B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F2)). This increase was maintained at day 7 of differentiation although to a lesser degree (Fig. 2C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F2)). When analysed as the percentage increase in CK activity at day 7 versus day 0, differentiation was enhanced comparably with both IGF-I (416 ± 49%, P = 0.006) and LR3 (399 ± 42%, P = 0.003) versus day 7 control 318 ± 32%. There were no significant differences between either IGF-I or LR3 in their capacity to increase CK activity, P = 0.10. TNFα (20 ng ml−1), however, caused a 47 ± 6% decrease in differentiation versus day 7 controls, P < 0.001, while no significant effects were seen with exogenous IGFBP-3 (Fig. 2C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F2)).

Figure 2. 
Effect of IGF-I, LR3 IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and TNFα on myotube formation and CK activity
Cells were characterized pre- and post-differentiation using antibodies to the muscle-specific protein desmin. A, differentiation was manipulated with a single dose of 50 ng ml−1 IGF-I, 50 ng ml−1 LR3 IGF-I, 150 ng ml−1 IGFBP-3 and 20 ng ml−1 TNFα. Representative micrographs are shown. Scale bar = 100 μm. B, CK activity at day 3 of differentiation. C, CK activity following 7 days of differentiation. The data represent the mean percentage increase in CK activity versus day 0 controls ± s.e.m. from 14 individuals. Statistical analysis was performed using a Student's paired t test; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.
To establish whether the actions of IGF on muscle were via hypertrophy, we calculated the percentage increase in protein versus day 0 controls along with the effects of IGFBP-3 and TNFα. As expected protein levels were significantly increased at day 7 in control cells, by 74 ± 10% (P < 0.001), although cell numbers remained constant. Protein levels were further enhanced by IGF-I (40 ± 8%, P < 0.001), LR3 (48 ± 11%, P < 0.001) and also TNFα (35 ± 7%, P < 0.001). IGFBP-3 was without effect (Fig. 3A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F3)). The increase in protein levels following TNFα exposure was unexpected as TNFα reduced myotube formation and inhibited differentiation (Fig. 2A and C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F2)). To examine if the increased protein levels were due to increased cell numbers, we analysed the number of cells from six random fields of view from 12 individuals. Interestingly, a single dose of 20 ng ml−1 TNFα at day 0 had no impact on myoblast proliferation (Fig. 3B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F3)) but elevated total cell numbers by increasing fibroblast number, 55 ± 9 per field of view, over day 7 controls, 38 ± 6 per field of view, although this did not reach significance. In contrast, both IGF-I and LR3 significantly increased myoblast proliferation, by 56 ± 19% (P = 0.015) and 98 ± 28% (P = 0.002), respectively, versus day 7 control (Fig. 3B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F3)). However, they were ineffective at enhancing fibroblast growth (data not shown). In addition, the average number of nuclei per myotube (a positive indicator of myotube size) was also significantly increased by IGF-I, 10.2 ± 0.6 (P < 0.001), and LR3, 11.1 ± 0.9 (P < 0.001), versus day 7 controls, 5.2 ± 0.3 (Fig. 3B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F3)). Conversely, TNFα significantly reduced the number of nuclei per myotube to 2.6 ± 0.6 (P = 0.009), indicating fewer myoblasts involved in differentiation, while IGFBP-3 was without effect (Fig. 3B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F3)). Having investigated differences in skeletal muscle hyperplasia and hypertrophy, we further analysed the percentage of myotubes formed. The mean percentage myotube formation at day 7 (67 ± 4%) was significantly increased above day 0 controls (1.0 ± 0.4%), P < 0.001, but could not be altered with any of IGF-I, LR3 or IGFBP-3, suggesting that the IGFs play a prominent role in myotube size by increasing the number of cells incorporated into individual myotubes but do not impact on the number of myotubes formed. As expected, the percentage of myoblasts forming myotubes following TNFα exposure was significantly reduced (15 ± 5%, P = 0.004) versus control at day 7.

Figure 3. 
Effect of IGF-I, LR3 IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and TNFα on proliferation and differentiation
Skeletal myoblasts were differentiated for 7 days and either lysed for protein determination or stained for desmin and analysed using Image Pro plus as described in Methods. A, protein levels were significantly increased at day 7 differentiation and further enhanced by 50 ng ml−1 IGF-I, 50 ng ml−1 LR3 IGF-I and 20 ng ml−1 TNFα (P < 0.001). IGFBP-3 at 150 ng ml−1 was without effect. B, both IGF-I (P = 0.015) and LR3 IGF-I, (P = 0.002) significantly increased myoblast proliferation (filled bars) and the number of cells forming each myotube above untreated controls (open bars) (P < 0.001). Conversely, TNFα significantly reduced the number of myoblasts involved in myotube formation (P = 0.009). C, the mean percentage change in CK activity versus day 7 controls demonstrates that both IGF-I and LR3 IGF-I rescue the inhibition of differentiation by TNFα. The analytical data ± s.e.m. were determined from 12 individuals (A and B) and 5 individuals (C). Statistical analysis was performed using Student's paired t test; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.
Since differentiation was reduced in the presence of TNFα, we next investigated whether IGF-I or LR3 could rescue this inhibition. The mean percentage change in CK activity versus day 7 controls demonstrates that both IGF-I and LR3 can rescue the inhibition of differentiation by TNFα, by 47 ± 12% (P = 0.018) and 50 ± 12% (P = 0.016), respectively, taking differentiation back to control levels (Fig. 3C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F3)). No significant differences were observed between the different analogues of IGF-I (P = 0.50), suggesting that the endogenous production of IGFBP-3 did not effect the response of exogenous IGF-I, thus implicating an IGFBP-independent mode of action. Addition of IGFBP-3 was without effect on rescuing the inhibition of differentiation by TNFα (15 ± 11%, P = 0.25).
Insulin-like growth factors promote and TNFα inhibits IGFBP-3 production and secretion
We have previously reported altered regulation of IGFBP-3 secretion in adults (Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)), with evidence of IGF-I increasing and TNFα decreasing this process with parallel changes seen in CK activity. To this end we investigated both production and secretion of this protein in response to IGF and TNFα (alone or in combination) in the children's skeletal muscle cultures. Both IGF-I and LR3 increased IGFBP-3 levels within the cells after 7 days in LSM, by 38 ± 3% (P < 0.001) and 62 ± 6% (P < 0.001), respectively, while TNFα demonstrated an inhibition by 53 ± 3% (P < 0.001) (Fig. 4A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F4)). As for CK analysis, the inhibition of IGFBP-3 production by TNFα was rescued with IGF-I and LR3, by 84 ± 18% (P = 0.009) and 141 ± 33% (P = 0.017), respectively, although there were no significant differences between either IGF-I analogue (P = 0.08). It is interesting to note that while exogenous IGFBP-3 was still detectable after 7 days in culture (indicating either surface binding or internalization) and able to enhance endogenous IGFBP-3 production by 67 ± 6% (P < 0.001), it was unable to rescue the inhibition of IGFBP-3 production by TNFα (Fig. 4A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F4)). Day 7 conditioned media were also analysed to determine IGFBP-3 secretion by Western immunoblotting (Fig. 4B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F4)) and RIA (Fig. 4C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F4)). IGF-I and LR3 increased IGFBP-3 secretion by 36 ± 5% (P < 0.001) and 14 ± 5% (P = 0.016), respectively, although IGF-I was more effective (P = 0.002), possibly in part by increasing the stability of endogenous IGFBP-3 (Fig. 4B and C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F4)). The addition of IGFBP-3 at day 0 could still be detected after 7 days in LSM but showed evidence of proteolytic degradation and was without significant effect on further IGFBP-3 secretion (Fig. 4B and C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F4)) despite the elevated production. TNFα, however, significantly reduced the secretion of intact and fragmented IGFBP-3, by 49 ± 3% (P < 0.001) and it was rescued by a coincubation with either IGF-I or LR3, by 53 ± 13% (P = 0.03) and 38 ± 6% (P = 0.001), respectively.

Figure 4. 
Insulin-like growth factors promote and TNFα inhibits IGFBP-3 production and secretion
Differentiation was manipulated with a single dose of 50 ng ml−1 IGF-I, 50 ng ml−1 LR3 IGF-I and 150 ng ml−1 IGFBP-3, or with and without 20 ng ml−1 TNFα. IGFBP-3 levels were determined at day 7 of differentiation. A, representative Western immunoblot of endogenous IGFBP-3 production from 50 μg of whole cell lysates (upper panel) with NHS control and IGFBP-3 spike representing the addition of nonglycosylated protein. The percentage change in IGFBP-3 production versus day 7 controls was calculated by densitometry from 5 individuals (lower panel). B, representative Western immunoblot of day 7 conditioned media, demonstrating IGFBP-3 secretion. C, the secretion of IGFBP-3 was confirmed by RIA. The data represent the mean IGFBP-3 levels ± s.e.m. from 5 individuals. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's paired t test; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001. NHS, normal human serum.
Child versus adult skeletal muscle myoblast differentiation
To observe if there were any differences in growth factor and cytokine manipulated differentiation between children and adults we differentiated four parallel cultures from each group (children: (2 male/2 female) median (range) age was 4.5 (1.9–8.0) years; adults: (2 male/2 female) median (range) age was 37 (35.5–40.5) years). Children's myoblasts demonstrated a higher basal level of CK activity, 917 ± 21 mU mg−1 ml−1, compared to adult cultures, 152 ± 31 mU mg−1 ml−1 (P < 0.001), and this remained true following 7 days of differentiation, 2270 ± 156 mU mg−1 ml−1 versus 551 ± 82 mU mg−1 ml−1 (P = 0.004) (Fig. 5 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F5)). The IGFs were able to increase differentiation in both groups, but, to our surprise, IGFBP-3 had different effects. While no impact was evident on differentiation in the children's cells, an inhibitory response in the adult cultures was seen when compared to day 7 controls, 366 ± 60 mU mg−1 ml−1 versus 551 ± 82 mU mg−1 ml−1 (P = 0.04) (Fig. 5 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F5)), which has been reported previously (Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)). TNFα inhibited differentiation in both groups. When the data were expressed as the percentage change in CK activity at day 7 versus day 0, an interesting pattern emerged, with adult myoblasts demonstrating a greater increase in both control and growth factor-mediated differentiation and a greater decrease following TNFα exposure (Table 1 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#T1)). As this may well have arisen from lower levels of CK activity at day 0 (for the IGFs at least), we further analysed the percentage differences from day 7 controls. Interestingly, IGF-I also enhanced differentiation to a greater extent in adult cultures, 157 ± 10%, versus children, 135 ± 6% (P = 0.033), but no differences between the two culture models were observed with LR3, 134 ± 7% versus 127 ± 7%, respectively (P = 0.45). The effect of IGFBP-3 on adult myoblasts was further demonstrated, revealing a 34 ± 7% inhibition of differentiation; no effect was seen in children as previously described. TNFα inhibited differentiation in both cell culture models, but was more effective in adults, −87 ± 4%, versus children, −41 ± 13% (P = 0.040).
  Differentiation capacity in child versus adult skeletal muscle
Differentiation was manipulated with a single dose of 50 ng ml−1 IGF-I, 50 ng ml−1 LR3, 150 ng ml−1 IGFBP-3 and 20 ng ml−1 TNFα in both child (filled bars) and adult (open bars) cultures. CK activity was determined at day 0 and 7. The data represent the mean CK activity in triplicate ± s.e.m. from 4 individuals for each group run in parallel. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's paired t test; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.

Table 1. Percentage increase in CK activity versus day 0 controls
To elucidate why IGF-I was more effective at enhancing differentiation in adults, we examined the endogenous secretion of IGFBP-3 by RIA, hypothesizing that an increase in IGFBP-3 may sequester exogenous IGF-I and limit its capacity to enhance differentiation. Untreated day 7 controls demonstrated higher IGFBP-3 levels in children by 62 ± 26% (P = 0.013). Interestingly, the effect of IGF-I on increased IGFBP-3 secretion above day 7 controls was comparable in both children, 36 ± 5%, and adults, 42 ± 7%, as was LR3, although to a lesser degree, 14 ± 5% versus 19 ± 6%, suggesting conferred stability of endogenous IGFBP-3 by IGF-I. It is interesting to note that while TNFα was more effective at inhibiting differentiation in adults, its effect on inhibiting IGFBP-3 secretion was comparable in both children, −49 ± 3%, and adults, −48 ± 3%.
The influence of TNFα on glucose transport
Having established differences in the impact of TNFα to inhibit differentiation between children and adults, we next investigated whether differences existed in glucose uptake following exposure to this cytokine, which is known to be implicated in the aetiology of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes (Hotamisligil & Spiegelman, 1994 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-24)), by exerting its effects on insulin signalling (Hotamisligil et al. 1994 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-23)), glucose metabolism (Borst et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-3)) or both. Differentiated skeletal muscle myotubes were treated for 24 h with 20 ng ml−1 TNFα, washed, and glucose transport assessed following a 10 min incubation with 2-deoxy-[3H]d-glucose. TNFα stimulated basal glucose transport versus untreated controls in both child, 68 ± 17% (P = 0.003) and adult myotube cultures, 149 ± 30% (P = 0.03) (Fig. 6A (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F6)). Adult myotubes were more responsive (P = 0.050).

Effect of TNFα on glucose transport and GLUT1/4 expression
Following differentiation, cells were treated with 20 ng ml−1 TNFα for 24 h and glucose transport determined using 2-deoxy-d-glucose. A, glucose transport in control and TNFα-treated cultures of child and adult skeletal muscle. B, GLUT1 expression in control and TNFα-treated cells. Representative micrographs are shown. Scale bar = 50 μm. C, expression of GLUT1 significantly increases in membrane fractions following TNFα exposure versus untreated controls, while no effect was seen on GLUT4 abundance. The data in A represent the mean 2-deoxy-d-glucose transport in triplicate ± s.e.m. from 4 parallel cultures of child and adult skeletal muscle. The data in C were obtained from densitometric analysis from 3 separate children's biopsies. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's paired t test; *P < 0.05.
GLUT1 and GLUT4 abundance in children's skeletal muscle
To evaluate if the TNFα-induced changes in basal glucose uptake resulted from changes in the expression of GLUT1 (a glucose transporter protein responsible for basal glucose uptake; Ebeling et al. 1998 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-11)), we analysed the cultures by immunocytochemistry and by isolating crude membrane fractions from whole cell lysates. Using antibodies to GLUT1, we reveal that exposure to TNFα for 24 h caused an up-regulation in the expression of this protein (Fig. 6B (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F6)). This was confirmed by immunoblotting of crude membrane fractions from whole cell lysates as demonstrated in (Fig. 6C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F6)), with a significant increase in membrane GLUT1 abundance (P = 0.019) over untreated controls. In addition to GLUT1 abundance, we examined if changes were present in the insulin-stimulated glucose transporter protein, GLUT4. There was no change in membrane levels in response to TNFα (Fig. 6C (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F6)).
Effect of p38MAPK and nitric oxide synthase inhibitors on TNFα induced glucose transport in children's myotubes
The actions of TNFα have been shown to occur through p38MAPK (Ho et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-22)) and also by alterations in the nitric oxide synthase (NOS) pathways (Bedard et al. 1997 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-2)). Indeed, we have observed enhanced p38MAPK activation in the presence of TNFα in our model (data not shown), suggesting that it plays an important role in skeletal muscle maintenance and metabolism. We therefore utilized a broad range p38MAPK inhibitor (SB202190) and NOS inhibitor (l-NAME) to investigate if inhibition of these pathways could alter the changes observed in glucose transport following exposure to TNFα. To avoid the inherent problems of inhibitor degradation over time, we performed the experiments acutely over 90 min, with a 30 min preincubation of 1 μm SB202190 or 1 μm l-NAME followed by a 60 min exposure with 20 ng ml−1 TNFα. As for a 24 h exposure, TNFα demonstrated an increase in basal glucose transport by 58 ± 11% over controls (P = 0.002) (Fig. 7 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F7)). The addition of SB202190 and l-NAME reduced the TNFα-induced increases to 37 ± 11% (P = 0.001) and 28 ± 5% (P = 0.05), respectively (Fig. 7 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#F7)). These data suggest that TNFα may indeed be acting via both p38MAPK and NOS pathways to increase glucose transport.



p38MAPK and NOS inhibitors reduce the effect of TNFα on glucose transport in children's myotubes
Differentiated cells were treated with 20 ng ml−1 TNFα for 60 min either with or without a predose of 1 μm SB202190 or 1 μml-NAME for 30 min and glucose transport determined. The data represent the mean 2-deoxy-d-glucose transport in triplicate ± s.e.m. from 6 individuals. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's paired t test; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.
Previous Section (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#sec-13)Next Section (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#sec-22)
Discussion
We have utilized skeletal muscle biopsies from prepubertal children, to establish a unique primary cell culture model. The myoblasts were characterized and the actions of IGF-I and TNFα on differentiation, IGFBP-3 production/secretion and glucose metabolism examined. The model was also compared with primary adult skeletal muscle cultures. Most studies of skeletal muscle cells to date have focused on animal cell lines (Roeder et al. 1988 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-35)) or adult myoblast cultures (Crown et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-9)). None have focused on a childhood population where differences may exist, prior to augmentation of the growth hormone–insulin-like growth factor axis and effects of sex steroids during or following puberty.
The isolation, characterization and culture of children's skeletal muscle cells was successful in all biopsies collected. Cultures contained an average of 57 ± 3% myoblasts, higher than we previously reported in adult cultures (Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)). This may reflect a greater number of satellite cells in the original biopsies, which are thought to negatively correlate with age (Renault et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-34); Foulstone et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-18)). All cultures successfully differentiated into multinucleated myotubes following 7 days in LSM. Differentiation was associated with an increase in protein content without a change in myoblast or fibroblast number, indicating that myotube formation is accompanied by active protein deposition. Basal and differentiated CK activity were higher in the children's cultures and may have been influenced by the greater number of myoblasts at day 0, as CK activity at day 7 correlates positively with initial myoblast number (Foulstone et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-18)). IGFBP-3, the predominant binding protein produced by human skeletal muscle cultures, accumulated in the medium as the cells differentiated. Interestingly, children's myoblasts secrete higher levels of IGFBP-3 than adult cultures (Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)). Since IGFBP-3 has been shown to have IGF-independent effects such as growth inhibition (Valentinis et al. 1995 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-48); Yamanaka et al. 1999 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-50)), we postulate that local levels may vary throughout life depending on the requirement for cellular growth. Indeed, we previously demonstrated that fetal myoblasts secrete lower levels of IGFBP-3 than adult myoblasts (Crown et al. 2000 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-9)), which may influence their proliferation capacity and increase the overall stem cell population. IGFBP-3 then rises before puberty to limit satellite cell proliferation, while avoiding depletion of the myoblast stem cell pool, then lowers during adulthood allowing skeletal muscle maintenance and repair. Analysis of IGF-I and II secretion in our primary myoblast and myotube cultures demonstrated undetectable amounts of IGF-I (similar to adults), but low levels of IGF-II in media from all cultures tested, as has been shown in C2 muscle cells (Tollefsen et al. 1989 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-45); Rosen et al. 1993 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-37)).
The impact of IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and TNFα on skeletal muscle differentiation was also examined. Both IGF-I and its analogue LR3 elicited comparable increases in myotube hypertrophy, protein content, and CK activity over controls, with the greatest difference observed at day 3. The augmented differentiation by IGF-I was concomitant with an increase in myoblast hyperplasia and myoblast incorporation into each myotube fibre; however, the percentage of myotubes formed was unaffected. We suggest that IGF-I is implicated in enhanced myoblast fusion (facilitated by an increase in myoblast number), which may in turn drive a more rapid differentiation process, in part by up-regulating myogenin protein expression (Quinn et al. 1993 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-33)). These findings are supported in animal (Mitchell et al. 2002 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-30)) and adult human investigations (Foulstone et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-18)). That IGF-I does not increase the percentage of myotubes formed is highly relevant to the in vivo situation where myofibre number does not change, and muscle size increases through a process of hypertrophy, analogous to what is witnessed here.
The equivalent actions of exogenous IGF-I and LR3 on differentiation suggest that the large amounts of endogenously secreted IGFBP-3 did not affect the responses observed. The IGFs have been shown to increase the levels of IGFBPs in conditioned media of several cell types (as reviewed by Firth & Baxter, 2002 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-14)), in part by increasing transcription and stabilization of mRNA and subsequent stabilization of the secreted proteins (Conover, 1991 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-7)). IGF-I and LR3 both increased IGFBP-3 levels in a differential manner. LR3 altered IGFBP-3 production and IGF-I impacted on IGFBP-3 secretion. The different affinities of these IGFs for IGFBPs may play a role, allowing LR3 (with insignificant binding affinity toward the IGFBPs) to bind to IGF-IR and initiate its response, while exogenous IGF-I may associate with and stabilize secreted IGFBP-3, which further account for the elevated levels seen in conditioned media. Interestingly, the ability of IGF-I to increase CK activity was more pronounced in adult than children's cultures, while the effect of LR3 was equivalent in both cell models. These data provide us with an interesting model to investigate the different roles that IGFBP-3 may play in skeletal muscle differentiation in childhood and adulthood. IGFBP-3 did not appear to elicit an effect on basal or IGF-induced differentiation in children, but clearly is playing a manipulatory role in adults. Proteolytic status may be important.
As expected, TNFα inhibited morphological and biochemical differentiation along with a reduction in endogenous IGFBP-3 secretion in both culture models, although adult myoblasts were more susceptible. We suggest that differences in TNFα Receptor-1 expression or its proteolytically cleaved soluble form may be involved, since alterations in these can either block or prolong the bioavailability of TNFα (Aderka, 1996 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-1)). Alternatively, TNFα may directly alter myoblast fusion, as fewer nuclei were incorporated into myotubes. These marked decreases in differentiation were paralleled with an increase in cellular proliferation of fibroblasts but not myoblasts. The differential effects on growth of these cells remain to be elucidated. That TNFα did not stimulate or inhibit myoblast proliferation suggests that inhibition of myotube formation was not a result of myoblast growth or loss. Interestingly, a co-incubation of IGF-I or LR3 but not IGFBP-3 with TNFα, rescued the inhibition of differentiation, implicating different mechanisms, other than increased production or conferred stability of IGFBP-3 in inhibiting or promoting differentiation in children. In addition, we have shown that children's skeletal muscle not only secretes higher levels of endogenous IGFBP-3 than adult cells, but also respond differently to exogenous levels of this protein, with no evidence of the inhibitory effects, as seen in the differentiation of adult myoblasts (Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)). We suggest that differences in proteolytic cleavage of IGFBP-3 may be important for different responses, since previous findings by our group have demonstrated predominantly intact IGFBP-3 present in adults (Foulstone et al. 2003 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-19)), while these data from children demonstrate an increase in proteolytically cleaved IGFBP-3. The proteases present are most likely secreted by the cells since cleaved IGFBP-3 was only seen in conditioned media and not in lysates. More importantly, the proteolysis observed at the cellular level may be an important mechanism for regulating IGF–IGFBP interaction and local IGF tissue availability as has been demonstrated in prostate (Conover et al. 1995 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-8)) and breast cancer models (Salahifar et al. 1997 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-39)).
Further to investigating the effects of TNFα on the parameters of differentiation, we investigated its effects on basal glucose transport, since there are conflicting reports on the effects of TNFα on glucose metabolism in skeletal muscle, with most if not all utilizing cells of either animal or adult human origin. Using parallel cultures of differentiated adult and children's skeletal muscle, we have shown similar findings to those using in vivo models (Evans et al. 1989 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-13)), whereby TNFα causes a stimulatory effect on basal glucose transport. TNFα had a greater effect in cells derived from adults, possibly resulting from differences in TNFR1 expression as previously suggested. To elucidate the mechanisms of TNFα-induced glucose transport in children we initially investigated the expression of GLUT1, reported to be up-regulated by TNFα in both adipocytes (Hauner et al. 1995 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-21)) and skeletal muscle (Ciaraldi et al. 1998 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-5)). Indeed, our findings are similar in this respect. The actions of TNFα on metabolism may also occur through a nitric oxide-dependent mechanism, since the NOS inhibitor l-NAME down-regulated the TNFα-induced glucose transport, which has been previously shown in rat skeletal muscle (Bedard et al. 1997 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-2)). Whether this results from a decrease in the expression of the GLUT1 transporter protein in our model remains to be elucidated. We have also shown that TNFα may elicit its responses through p38MAPK, as have others (Ho et al. 2004 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-22)). While TNFα appears to be beneficial in the short term, evidence suggests that prolonged exposure can lead to skeletal muscle and whole body insulin resistance (Lang et al. 1992 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-26); Storz et al. 1999 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-44)), possibly via indirect mechanisms such as elevation of free fatty acids in the circulation (Sethi & Hotamisligil, 1999 (http://jp.physoc.org/content/568/1/229.full#ref-41)).
In summary, we have shown that the IGF system as well as TNFα plays a pivotal role in the regulation of skeletal muscle maintenance and metabolism, with differences observed between children and adult cultures. Alterations in any of these processes could influence the equilibrium of skeletal muscle maintenance and loss associated with many chronic severe illnesses such as cancer cachexia or alternatively in patients with obesity-related type 2 diabetes. Our findings indicate that future studies must use age-specific cell models to appropriately investigate the mechanisms of muscle pathophysiology in both normal and diseased individuals.

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-23-2013, 12:18 PM
another issue that people should be aware of is that there are many igf receptors in the intestinal tract and thus long term chronic administration of igf will cause hypertrophy of the smooth muscle tissue in the digestive tract. this will cause an increase in abdominal girth and protusion known to many as pep gut.

russianstar
02-24-2013, 05:42 PM
another issue that people should be aware of is that there are many igf receptors in the intestinal tract and thus long term chronic administration of igf will cause hypertrophy of the smooth muscle tissue in the digestive tract. this will cause an increase in abdominal girth and protusion known to many as pep gut.

Ive read that before, more studies on children and diseased, or mandatory studies without the inclusion of weight training, the pathways and responses when somone promotes muscle breakdown through training is entirely different than through muscle cachexia.
E-peptide signaling, mitogenic, and motogenic effects are dependent upon IGF-IR... thats the mechanism we are interested in.. PGC-1α is a transcriptional coactivator induced by exercise, this elevates igf levels it is highly expressed in exercised muscle, and therefore induces IGF1 and represses myostatin, and expression of PGC-1α4 in vitro and in vivo induces robust skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Importantly, mice with skeletal muscle-specific transgenic expression of PGC-1α4 show increased muscle mass and strength and dramatic resistance to the muscle wasting of cancer cachexia. Expression of PGC-1α4 is preferentially induced in mouse and human muscle during resistance exercise.

Exercise and igf etc = good, No exercise so no pgc-1a4 = no point

Russianstar.

I am a biochemist with a phd, and ive trained many bodybuilders, there is science, and then there is real world results, real users who have used igf can testify to it benefits on either maintaining muscle or adding lbm.
But they exercise... so sorry i guess this should be posted on a muscle buiding forum?

russianstar
02-24-2013, 05:52 PM
increased pgc-1af, after exercise allows for a unique pathway in which igf is able to act directly on muscle while myostatin is suppressed, thats how its able to cause muscle hyperplasia.

RS

Bryan Hildebrand
02-24-2013, 06:08 PM
I have one word that current western medicine has not, and for obvious reasons, will not study: synergism.

GH/IGF/Insulin. 2+2+2 = 12, not 6.

And I agree, IGF, in any of it's forms, will not cause direct hyperplasia, but the arguement that increased fluid retention in musculature trained will in turn increase strength which in turn, in the correct environment, cause hyperplasia. the biopsy methods mentioned in the articles I touched on above are not an overtly accurate method to determine hyperplasia. Dexascan however is. Do you have any IGF studies that used Dexa as the hyperplasia medium?

joe d
02-24-2013, 07:08 PM
I have one word that current western medicine has not, and for obvious reasons, will not study: synergism.

GH/IGF/Insulin. 2+2+2 = 12, not 6.

And I agree, IGF, in any of it's forms, will not cause direct hyperplasia, but the arguement that increased fluid retention in musculature trained will in turn increase strength which in turn, in the correct environment, cause hyperplasia. the biopsy methods mentioned in the articles I touched on above are not an overtly accurate method to determine hyperplasia. Dexascan however is. Do you have any IGF studies that used Dexa as the hyperplasia medium?
you left out t3 :)

joe d
02-24-2013, 07:17 PM
this is what i love about these studies. by the time you actually really understand the shit you figure out that it really means little when it comes to you or you find other research that states otherwise lol.

nothing trumps real world experience imo. i also respectfully disagree with the claims of the op.

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-24-2013, 10:25 PM
I have one word that current western medicine has not, and for obvious reasons, will not study: synergism.

GH/IGF/Insulin. 2+2+2 = 12, not 6.

And I agree, IGF, in any of it's forms, will not cause direct hyperplasia, but the arguement that increased fluid retention in musculature trained will in turn increase strength which in turn, in the correct environment, cause hyperplasia. the biopsy methods mentioned in the articles I touched on above are not an overtly accurate method to determine hyperplasia. Dexascan however is. Do you have any IGF studies that used Dexa as the hyperplasia medium?

bryan, actually in medicine we do use the terms synergy, potentiation, and additive effect. An example of this is the combination of meperidine (demerol) and (phenergan). A major side of promethazine is sedation. post operative administration of promethazine with meperidine allows one to use less meperidine which is a desirable effect. This is a b/c that promethazine potentiates the sedative effect of meperdine. in other words we know that the clinical effect is substantially greater than the combined effect of the two.

Also, in regards to your question about using Dexascan for a muscle cell hyperplasia medium, dexascans do not differentiate between tissue cell types. Dexa can give an exact number on the amount of lean body mass (everything but fat) but it cannot differentiate between muscle cell hypertrophy and hyperplasia. the only way to do that might be with an MRI or the most exact method is with biopsy an histological examination. this presents an issue however in that biopsy samples are significantly large and this necessitates a particularly invasive procedure to the research subjects themselves.

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-24-2013, 10:31 PM
increased pgc-1af, after exercise allows for a unique pathway in which igf is able to act directly on muscle while myostatin is suppressed, thats how its able to cause muscle hyperplasia.

RS

russianstar,
what is the name of the unique pathway you speak of? i am very interested to see this myself. unfortunately the research i have seen indicates this is not the case at all. please refer to the following:

"In order to address directly the question of whether
or not pharmacological inhibition of myostatin specifi-
callyincreasesmusclemass,wedevelopedaneutralizing
monoclonal antibody to myostatin and administered it
to mice. This treatment leads to an increase in muscle
size and in grip strength. The increase in muscle size is
the result of fiber hypertrophy. Aside from the increase
in fiber size, the muscle appears histologically normal.
Furthermore, the myostatin antibody treated mice have
normal organ size and histology, and normal serum
parameters. Thus inhibition of myostatin in adults spe-
cifically increases skeletal muscle size without obvious
side effects" - taken from the article below

Inhibition of myostatin in adult mice increases
skeletal muscle mass and strength
Lisa-Anne Whittemore, Kening Song, Xiangping Li, Jane Aghajanian, Monique Davies,
Stefan Girgenrath, Jennifer J. Hill, Mary Jalenak, Pamela Kelley, Andrea Knight,
Rich Maylor, Denise O Hara, Adele Pearson, Amira Quazi, Stephanie Ryerson,
Xiang-Yang Tan, Kathleen N. Tomkinson, Geertruida M. Veldman, Angela Widom,
Jill F. Wright, Steve Wudyka, Liz Zhao, and Neil M. Wolfman

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-24-2013, 10:38 PM
this is what i love about these studies. by the time you actually really understand the shit you figure out that it really means little when it comes to you or you find other research that states otherwise lol.

nothing trumps real world experience imo. i also respectfully disagree with the claims of the op.

igf does produce hypertrophy that is proven, it has not however been proven that igf produces hyperplasia. real world experience demonstrates this in the numerous amount of research trials that have been done with results published and reviews of the results by scholarly peers. if bodybuilders would be willing to undergo multiple muscle tissue biopsies within a specified amount of time, we might actually be able to see about the possibility of actual hyperplasia. everyone wants it to be true but just because a person gains muscle mass via hypertrophy doesn't mean hyperplasia is actually occuring

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-24-2013, 11:03 PM
increased pgc-1af, after exercise allows for a unique pathway in which igf is able to act directly on muscle while myostatin is suppressed, thats how its able to cause muscle hyperplasia.

RS

in regards to igf-ir:

"IGF-I and its receptor IGF-IR are seen as critical effectors of muscle hypertrophy, a notion recently questioned. Using MKR transgenic mice that express a dominant negative IGF-IR only in skeletal muscle, we have examined the role of the IGF-IR signaling in differentiation and repair of muscle fibers after damage-induced muscle regeneration. This process is impaired in MKR muscle, with incomplete regeneration, persistence of infiltrating cells and sustained expression of differentiation markers. Analysis of MKR and WT muscle-derived progenitor stem cells and myoblasts showed twice as many such cells in MKR muscle and an incomplete in vitro differentiation, that is, despite similar levels of myogenin expression, the level of fusion of MKR myoblasts was significantly reduced in comparison to WT myoblasts. These data show IGF-IR signaling is not only required at early hyperplasia stages of muscle differentiation, but also for late stages of myofiber maturation and hypertrophy."

Impaired muscle regeneration and myoblast differentiation in mice with a muscle-specific KO of IGF-IR
DOI: 10.1002/jcp.22218

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-24-2013, 11:13 PM
increased pgc-1af, after exercise allows for a unique pathway in which igf is able to act directly on muscle while myostatin is suppressed, thats how its able to cause muscle hyperplasia.

RS

you quoted this study:
A PGC-1α isoform induced by resistance training regulates skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Cell. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23217713#) 2012 Dec 7;151(6):1319-31. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.10.050
in regards to the study, if you read the last sentence you will see that it clearly states, "These studies identify a PGC-1α protein that regulates and coordinates factors involved in skeletal muscle hypertrophy." It does not say that pgc-1 alpha plays a role in hyperplasia or that igf or myostatin can induce hyperplasia in the adult human being.

russianstar
02-25-2013, 03:50 AM
you quoted this study:
A PGC-1α isoform induced by resistance training regulates skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Cell. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23217713#) 2012 Dec 7;151(6):1319-31. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2012.10.050


in regards to the study, if you read the last sentence you will see that it clearly states, "These studies identify a PGC-1α protein that regulates and coordinates factors involved in skeletal muscle hypertrophy." It does not say that pgc-1 alpha plays a role in hyperplasia or that igf or myostatin can induce hyperplasia in the adult human being.

I didnt quote it actually, i have a photgraphic memory, However, that was a good read.
Sadly your forgetting the whole purpose of the pgc-1a protein, its distinguished after exercise.. its actions on allowing igf to play its roll are not even discussed in studies.
The MAPK-ERK pathway for example increases cartilage growth, and collagen type 2 not discussed above.
Again above the role GHR activation plays on the GHR/IGF-I pathway isnt discussed, that is one of the pathways through which hyperplasia is caused.. Again this pathway is altered after resistance training.
IGF-I is a result of substantially increased levels of the mRNA for myogenin, this seems to cause terminal myogenesis.
Certain myoblasts are able to express sufficient amounts of autocrine IGF-II to stimulate myogenesis after a period of time, after training this is when they are most active, This is how IGF has the unusual ability of stimulating both proliferation and differentiation of myoblasts.

You said IGF has no affect on skeletel muscle cell hyperplasia. But its not a case of Wether or not igf does, its the role it plays that leads to hyperplasia, for example IGF-IR signaling, thats the igf receptor. Its response following resistance training needs to be noted, otherwise we might aswell be throwing muscletech products at each other.

Here i a quote from j clin invest
During the development of skeletal muscle, myoblasts withdraw from the cell cycle and differentiate into myotubes. The insulin-like growth factors IGF-I and IGF-II, through their cognate tyrosine kinase receptor (IGF-I receptor), are known to play a role in this process. After withdrawal of myoblasts from the cell cycle, IGF-I promotes muscle differentiation by inducing the expression or activity of myogenic regulatory factors.
This is exactly the same response as muscle is broken down.

I dont like quoting chickens but here..

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11803566

Yes they were embrios, but the point to note was the difference igf made, an embrio is a developing chick, the whole idea of using an external igf is to help the muscles grow after they are broken down, we are trying to trick the body into thinking its at an early stage of development, the pathways are all in place following resistance training, for IGF to be able to bind to its receptor, igf-ir, and then for pgc-1a to illicit its affects on lowering mysotatin, together through the pathways and mediators outlined above, IGF is able to play an indirect role on causing hperplasia.

RS

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-25-2013, 11:53 AM
RS, thank you for your reply, I am following your rationale completely. However, I cannot find anything whether it be forum or literature that shows evidence at this present time that we have been able to trick the body into thinking it is at an early stage of development. As stated in the article I referenced earlier it does show that postnatal inhibition of myostatin leads to hypertrophy as do other articles. Down below I have put some of my reasoning and would very much accept any critiques or issues that you have to offer as I can see that you are well versed in this area of science and I am not against adult muscle hyperplasia, in fact I would very much like to see it made possible.

This excerpt discusses the role of myostatin very well.
"Myostatin (also called GDF-8) was originally identified in mice (McPherron et al., 1997), and was shown to be a member of the TGF-b family and therefore an inhibitor of skeletal muscle cell hyperplasia and differentiation. Gene targeting to disrupt the GDF-8 gene in mice increased muscle mass by 2–3 times by a combination of hyperplasia and hypertrophy. The identification of other growth factors involved in double-muscling (be they DM- specific factors or altered concentrations of typical growth factors at critical stages of growth) may facilitate the increase of muscle fibre number in other species. For example, FGFs are expressed by muscle cells in culture (Moore et al., 1991). They stimulate muscle cell proliferation, but inhibit differentiation, myogenin gene expression and also IGF-II gene expression, and could therefore play a role in controlling the timing of both proliferation and differentiation."
Hyperplasia involves the mononuclear skeletal muscle precursor cells (myoblasts and satellite cells), which subsequently become post-mitotic, align and fuse (differentiate) to form the multinuclear muscle fibers. Muscle fibers are then able to increase in cell size (hypertrophy) via the accretion of more protein. The total number of fibers in a muscle appears to be fixed at, or shortly after birth, with post-natal growth of muscle being entirely due to elongation and widening of the existing muscle fibers. However, this does not mean that the muscle precursor cells cease to grow at this stage, as the DNA content continues to increase until the animal approaches its mature size. Extra nuclei are recruited into muscle fibers from mono-nuclear myogenic cells known as satellite cells, which are enclosed beneath the basement membrane of the muscle fibers.

The only way for postnatal hyperplasia to occur is to create more myoblasts and satellite cells

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-25-2013, 11:58 AM
Growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) have a key role in the regulation of body size in growing animals but their role in adults is less clear. IGF-I clearly has anabolic activity but its mechanism of action as an endocrine, circulating hormone may be distinct from its activity as an autocrine/paracrine growth factor. IGF-IR signaling roles are stated previously in the thread.
The effects of IGF-I are mediated mainly by the type 1 IGF receptor (IGFR1), which has tyrosine kinase activity and signals through the phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase (PI3K)/AKT pathway. IGF-I also binds to the insulin receptor (IR) but with much lower (about 100-fold lower) affinity than to the IGF1R. The IR and IGF1R are dimeric transmembrane receptors and can form functional hybrids. The roles of hybrid receptors in cellular responses remain unclear.

It has been suggested, however, that myofiber splitting occurs if a myofiber becomes too large, but this has not been reported in humans. New myofibers may also form as a result of fusion of satellite cells (see below) and small myotubes and myofibers expressing myogenic markers can be found in human muscle after training. Nevertheless, the consensus is that an increase in muscle cross-sectional area is primarily due to an increase in myofiber CSA rather than myofiber number.
The growth-promoting effects of GH are mainly mediated by IGF-I. IGF-I infusion into hypophysectomized rats promotes growth in the absence of GH . However, the IGF-I knockout mouse is less growth retarded than the IGF-I and GHR double knockout, suggesting that GH also has IGF-I-independent effects There are effects that cannot be mimicked by infusion of IGF-I. It has been demonstrated that GH administration increases skeletal muscle IGF-I mRNA production in hypophysectomized rats 20-fold, whereas the increase observed after IGF-I treatment is only 2.5-fold .This may be relevant to skeletal muscle mass regulation as the autocrine/paracrine levels of IGF-I appear to be more important than the systemic/circulating levels of IGF-I as discussed later.
IGF-I, unlike GH, is critical for intrauterine growth. The IGF-I and IGFIR knockout mice have birth weights of 60 and 45% of normal, respectively, whereas mice with severe GH deficiency or GH insensitivity have normal birth weight. Disruptions in the IGF-I signaling pathway also result in reduced intrauterine growth as observed in mice deficient in Akt1, insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS-1) and IRS-2. Critically, high levels of circulating IGF-I do not seem to be required for intrauterine growth as liver-specific IGF-I knockouts show similar body weight to controls at birth and up to 3 months of age. The liver-specific knockout has some postnatal growth reduction compared with wild types, but it is not as severe as in the total IGF knockout (Baker et al., 1993 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2439518/#bib9)). This implies that locally produced, autocrine/paracrine IGF-I plays an important role in pre- and postnatal growth. Another explanation, however, is also plausible. The free, bioavailable IGF-I levels in the liver knockouts may be similar to those in the wild-type animals. If this is the case, the change in circulating IGF-I might not be expected to have any effect.

It has been shown that mice lacking IGF1R specifically in muscle have smaller muscles than their wild-type counterparts as well as reduced myofiber CSA. GH administration leads to increased muscle weight and myofiber CSA in wild-type animals, but not in the muscle IGF1R knockouts. Thus, the effects of GH on muscle in animals are likely to be mediated by IGF-I.
Despite the observations of an effect of GH and IGF-I on protein synthesis, the fact remains that gains in muscle mass are not observed in healthy subjects after long-term GH administration so any benefits are unlikely to be due to muscle mass gains. In the GH plus exercise groups, circulating IGF-I levels and fat-free mass were consistently increased in comparison to placebo groups. Thus, it is possible to extrapolate that increasing circulating IGF-I would also be without consequence for muscle mass in healthy humans. Administration of IGF-I acutely activates muscle protein synthesis, but similarly to GH a 1-year administration did not result in increased lean body mass. The effects of GH on fat-free mass may be due to water retention, which is a known side effect of GH administration, or to an increase in soft tissue due to the stimulatory effects of GH on collagen synthesis.
Despite the lack of evidence for anabolic activity of GH in healthy humans, there is evidence for anticatabolic activity of GH as well as IGF-I.

In a study comparing infusion of IGF-I with GH, it was demonstrated that both agents reduce negative nitrogen balance during calorific restriction in humans. A single dose of GH was administered during 24-h period, whereas IGF-I was infused continuously each day. Serum IGF-I concentrations were threefold higher in the IGF-I-treated subjects compared with those on GH, but the treatments were equally effective at reducing the negative nitrogen balance. This suggests that the GH treatment was more potent, which is in line with GH having both IGF-I-mediated and direct effects. Alternatively, it may be due to the negative feedback inhibition of endogenous GH release or on autocrine/paracrine actions of the tissue IGF-I in the IGF-I treatment group. It is noteworthy that neither GH nor IGF-I resulted in positive nitrogen balance.

In most animal studies, GH is administered while the animals are still growing and this may confound the results in comparison to administration in fully grown animals. In addition, the species differences between rodents and humans in the functioning of the GH/IGF-I axis must be taken into account. Studies with transgenic and knockout animals are also complicated by the fact that the embryonic development of the tissue can be affected and this can have different consequences to altering gene expression once the animal has reached maturity. In summary, normal GH/IGF-I function does have a role in the development and maintenance of muscle mass, as gathered from evidence in GH-deficient patients, burn patients, hypophysectomized animals, and animal models in which GH receptor and IGF-IR activity are lacking. GH or IGF-I administration have, however, no proven benefits for muscle mass in healthy subjects in whom GH function is normal.

a recent paper showed that mechanical stimulation can induce hypertrophy in MKR mice, which overexpress a dominant-negative insulin receptor specifically in skeletal muscle that inhibits both IR or IGF1R signaling. This is surprising but not altogether unexpected as there are other pathways that are regulated by activity in muscle and can result in AKT signaling. AKT phosphorylation was also not impaired in the MKR mouse in response to overload.
Histological observations suggest that exercise and IGF-I have different modes of action (Lee et al., 2004 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2439518/#bib66)). IGF-I stimulates the fusion of satellite cells with existing fibers, as determined by an increase in the number of myofibers with centrally versus peripherally located nuclei. Resistance exercise on its own does not appreciably increase the number of centrally located nuclei. Centrally located nuclei are considered to be an index of newly fused nuclei or new myofiber formation. As the myofiber matures, the nuclei move to the periphery of the cell. Thus, it is possible that exercise did not induce appreciable satellite cell activation and fusion or that exercise is important for maturation of fibers and peripheral localization/maturation of myofibers. Alternatively, persistent increased IGF-I may actually delay myofiber maturation.

In line with the autocrine–paracrine theory of IGF-I action, the endocrinological status of animals and humans does not seem to affect the ability of muscles to hypertrophy following exercise. Hypophysectomized rats that have decreased circulating GH and IGF-I are able to hypertrophy to the same extent as controls. Humans with GH deficiency or the very elderly with low GH and IGF-I also adapt to resistance exercise by increasing muscle mass and strength.
IGF-I increases the size of human myotubes whether treatment begins while myoblasts are still proliferating or after proliferation has ceased. IGF-I appears to regulate human myotube size by activating protein synthesis, inhibiting protein degradation and inducing fusion of reserve cells. During differentiation in culture, the majority of cells exit the cell cycle and fuse, but there is always a small number of so-called reserve cells that remain mononucleated. Fusion of a greater proportion of reserve cells increases the number of nuclei found within myotubes (fusion index) and this will result in larger myotubes. Inhibition of several pathways (p42MAPK, calcineurin, AKT) reduces the fusion index and protein synthesis responses of human myoblasts to IGF-I treatment. On the other hand, inhibition of GSK3, a negative regulator of protein synthesis, mimics these responses in the absence of IGF-I. Inhibition of the p38 MAPK pathway has no effect, which is consistent with a role for this in myoblast proliferation rather than differentiation.
The effect of IGF-I on reserve cell recruitment appears to be indirect and to result from increased production of the cytokine interleukin-13 by treated myotubes. It remains to be demonstrated whether induction of satellite cells fusion is induced by interleukin-13 in vivo and whether expression on this cytokine in muscle is regulated by IGF-I. It is also unclear whether fusion of nuclei is a cause or consequence of activation of protein synthesis and cell size increase. The latter seems more likely as the phenotype of cells treated with rapamycin is much more dramatic than those treated with other inhibitors.

Treatment of mouse primary muscle cells with IGF-I or GH increases myotube size to the same extent. In agreement with the studies on human myoblasts using IGF-I, the GH treatment experiments resulted in larger myotubes with more nuclei and seemed to involve the signaling via the transcription factor NFATc2. This would suggest that in culture the effects of GH on muscle size are also mediated by IGF-I as demonstrated in vivo. Combined GH and IGF-I treatment was, however, more effective in increasing myotube size than either hormone on its own. Furthermore, hypertrophy of GHR−/− myotubes following IGF-I treatment was inferior to that of wild-type myotubes. These observations suggest that GH also has IGF-I-independent effects. This is supported by a comparison of the phenotypes of GHR−/− and IGF-I−/− knockout animals.

GH and IGF-I clearly play a role in muscle development pre- and postnatally. In GHD adults, there is evidence that serum GH affects muscle mass maintenance, but in healthy adults neither GH nor IGF-I has or enhances the hypertrophic effects of exercise. In contrast, much evidence supports the hypertrophic effect of autocrine/paracrine IGF-I in animals and suggests that it may play a role in adaptation to overload in both animals and humans. Increased muscle expression of IGF-I also enhances the effects of training in animals. Local injection of GH or IGF-I protein or plasmids is effective in animal models and may eventually be used with therapeutic ends. There is evidence for an effect of GH on other performance parameters that is related to increased lean body mass as opposed to increased skeletal muscle mass.

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-25-2013, 12:02 PM
RS, I will message you all of my references as I do not want to take up more room on this thread and for those who would like the references message me and i will send them to you as well.

s2h
02-25-2013, 12:20 PM
The vyvanse is working....

russianstar
02-25-2013, 02:26 PM
RS, I will message you all of my references as I do not want to take up more room on this thread and for those who would like the references message me and i will send them to you as well.

Its such a shame to be discussing this subject on its own and not taking in the whole picture.
I get what your trying to point out, when i say trying its not in a condesending way.. But the studies and argument your making is backed by science, but its not the area we need to be looking at...
Ok IGF doesnt cause skeletal muscle cell hyperplasia, but it certainly has an important role to play.
Its like DAA , it doesnt cause muscle growth alone, but its method of action increases lh and testosterone, which in turn when combined with training can cause increased muscle growth over what would normaly be seen.

Igf i believe has the same ability... I know of a bodybuilder whos user name is pscarb. He can testify to the fact that igf does increase the actions of AAS, and
causes more gains in mass.. this could just be hypertrophy however...
Because no Actual tests have been concluded on individuals involved in a weight training regime, i can only offer the science i feel backs my argument, Which i have above.
You have offered valid points, and have shown great respect which is very much appreciated, and i will certainly think about what you have said.

But i do think, if you talk to a lot of pros, they will believe that igf causes hyperplasia.. And this is something i have concluded after years of research.

I could keep posting up articles and references to support my view, and you yours, There is always some study to support somones opinion, and it might be divided.
Hopefully we will have many more deep conversations on this subject, But i fear if i continue, we will just go round in circles.

Kindest Regards RS

blergs
02-25-2013, 05:33 PM
Awesome thread.

I'm with russianstar though on the IGF

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-26-2013, 12:02 AM
Its such a shame to be discussing this subject on its own and not taking in the whole picture.
I get what your trying to point out, when i say trying its not in a condesending way.. But the studies and argument your making is backed by science, but its not the area we need to be looking at...
Ok IGF doesnt cause skeletal muscle cell hyperplasia, but it certainly has an important role to play.
Its like DAA , it doesnt cause muscle growth alone, but its method of action increases lh and testosterone, which in turn when combined with training can cause increased muscle growth over what would normaly be seen.

Igf i believe has the same ability... I know of a bodybuilder whos user name is pscarb. He can testify to the fact that igf does increase the actions of AAS, and
causes more gains in mass.. this could just be hypertrophy however...
Because no Actual tests have been concluded on individuals involved in a weight training regime, i can only offer the science i feel backs my argument, Which i have above.
You have offered valid points, and have shown great respect which is very much appreciated, and i will certainly think about what you have said.

But i do think, if you talk to a lot of pros, they will believe that igf causes hyperplasia.. And this is something i have concluded after years of research.

I could keep posting up articles and references to support my view, and you yours, There is always some study to support somones opinion, and it might be divided.
Hopefully we will have many more deep conversations on this subject, But i fear if i continue, we will just go round in circles.

Kindest Regards RS

RS,
I follow what you are saying and I agree that the whole picture needs to be addressed if hyperplasia is ever to be had and proven. I guess I have been somewhat indoctrinated by the field of work I have chosen and thus I have a hard time believing something to be true without absolute scientific proof that can be repeated. Therefore my responses to your posts and the focus of this thread has emphasized this mindset of an evidence based approach.

I do think there is much to be learned still with regards to the potential to induce hyperplasia in adults. I am also right there with you in agreement that igf along with AAS and other various exogenous drugs can be combined in a way that normal researchers have not done and this is an area that is severely lacking. There are tons of guys I am sure just like the bodybuilder pscarb who have changed their muscle mass way beyond their original genetic capabilities. What needs to happen is these guys need to start keeping accurate documentation and lab work etc of every aspect of their life so that the methodology and its results can be used to continue to grow the knowledge base. This would help not only the novice bodybuilder but also the patient with any type of muscle wasting disorder and who knows what else it could potentially impact.

One of the drawbacks to modern medicine in its present state is the somewhat dormant state that it has placed itself in. All one has to do is look at any pro bodybuilder to know that there is unlimited information to be learned and used in a beneficial manner. However with all the media coverage of pro-athletes and their drug use, a stigma has developed that overshadows the potential positives. Way back before law suits and regulations scientists and physicians learned new information by stepping outside the confines of current ideology. In medicine new treatment protocols are developed by drug companies that are only focused on profit. Providers only incorporate new drugs with FDA approval. The child with the need for muscle cell hyperplasia is left without many options while Jay Cutler has muscle to spare. Hopefully with the new improvements and innovations being made in these areas we will see ways to incorporate some of the information that many experienced body builders possess.

russianstar
02-26-2013, 03:06 AM
RS,
I follow what you are saying and I agree that the whole picture needs to be addressed if hyperplasia is ever to be had and proven. I guess I have been somewhat indoctrinated by the field of work I have chosen and thus I have a hard time believing something to be true without absolute scientific proof that can be repeated. Therefore my responses to your posts and the focus of this thread has emphasized this mindset of an evidence based approach.

I do think there is much to be learned still with regards to the potential to induce hyperplasia in adults. I am also right there with you in agreement that igf along with AAS and other various exogenous drugs can be combined in a way that normal researchers have not done and this is an area that is severely lacking. There are tons of guys I am sure just like the bodybuilder pscarb who have changed their muscle mass way beyond their original genetic capabilities. What needs to happen is these guys need to start keeping accurate documentation and lab work etc of every aspect of their life so that the methodology and its results can be used to continue to grow the knowledge base. This would help not only the novice bodybuilder but also the patient with any type of muscle wasting disorder and who knows what else it could potentially impact.

One of the drawbacks to modern medicine in its present state is the somewhat dormant state that it has placed itself in. All one has to do is look at any pro bodybuilder to know that there is unlimited information to be learned and used in a beneficial manner. However with all the media coverage of pro-athletes and their drug use, a stigma has developed that overshadows the potential positives. Way back before law suits and regulations scientists and physicians learned new information by stepping outside the confines of current ideology. In medicine new treatment protocols are developed by drug companies that are only focused on profit. Providers only incorporate new drugs with FDA approval. The child with the need for muscle cell hyperplasia is left without many options while Jay Cutler has muscle to spare. Hopefully with the new improvements and innovations being made in these areas we will see ways to incorporate some of the information that many experienced body builders possess.

I agree, its nice to come to some kind of coclusion in an amicable way, There is a lot of research needed which sadly i feel wont get done, not at least to improve bodybuilding, as the money is spent on improving of inding ways to treat bad health in general.

Thank you for getting my neurons into gear, its been a while since i discussed IGF (http://www.purchasepeptides.com/idevaffiliate/idevaffiliate.php?id=125)in terms of fitness or bodybuilding

Until the above happens i think the only thing we can go on is the tried and tested areas of meticulous detail, used by certain pros.. and the results got by the average user.

I do agree with IGF causing other problems though.. i wrote this article on it.

The enlarged heads and jaws of professional bodybuilders.
So whats the truth?
Look back in the day at bodybuilders like steve reeves, even giants like lou ferringo.. and you wont find the deformed look that many modern bodybuilders have somehow managed to achieve.
Yes in the past bodybuilders like Arnold had big jaws but if you look to his early pictures even at the age of 12 it was his genetic pre-disposition. The added androgens from years of use would of added to his male characteristics.. but the truth is the culprit today is not AAS.. its Igf-1 and HGH.
How have the jay cutlers and ronnie colemans of the modern age enlarged their own heads, increased the width of the jaw bone… not the muscle size wich is important.. and got the severely deformed look that many show.
The quest for success on the big stage has caused many to turn to the use of peptides, but the doses used have been far more than what you or I would probably consider.
30iu a day of HGH is not unheard of.. 800mcg of IGF-1LR3 is also not uncommon.. and both can increase the size of your internal organs and so it seems the size of the facial bones, After all the speculation i tried to do some research into what many competative bodybuilders use pre-contest and the results were suprising and scary, sadly i cannot mention the name of this individual but he was european bodybuilding champion in the 100kg class of 2005.
This is what he was using…
“20iu of HGH and 1mg of igf-lr3 everyday, calorie intake was over 7000k during off season, and those doses were combined with 1.8g of test e a week ,1g of tren, 70mg of dianabol wich was run 7 weeks on 7 weeks off during a year long cycle where a blast cycle followed by a cruise was incorporated, these were his cruise cycle doses..combined with 50mg of aromasin 3x a day.
Insulin was used during the cycle for a 4 week period at a time… Yes for you and I those doses look huge, but after a lengthy discussion with other pros in russia i found out these doses are actualy quite average. However, after talking to a few older pros, the actual androgen cycles and doses werent particulaly high, it seems these are often practised and used by professionals. They were in agreement though that when combined with LARGE doses of HGH or IGF that facial features change.. more flesh on the face, more muscle on the mandible, bigger lips, no im not talking about Acromegaly, But the characteristics are in fact quite similar.. here are some of the more common symptoms of Acromegaly..


Soft tissue swelling visibly resulting in enlargement of the hands, feet, nose, lips and ears, and a general thickening of the skin. In particular the appearance of the hands can indicate to a knowledgeable person that a stranger may be developing acromegaly; there are documented instances of physicians warning strangers that they had acromegaly.
Soft tissue swelling of internal organs, notably the heart with attendant weakening of its muscularity, and the kidneys, also the vocal cords resulting in a characteristic thick, deep voice and slowing of speech
Generalized expansion of the skull at the fontanelle (http://needtobuildmuscle.net/wiki/Fontanelle)
Pronounced brow protrusion, often with ocular distension
Pronounced lower jaw protrusion with attendant macroglossia (http://needtobuildmuscle.net/wiki/Macroglossia) (enlargement of the tongue) and teeth gapping
Hypertrichosis (http://needtobuildmuscle.net/wiki/Hypertrichosis), hyperpigmentation (http://needtobuildmuscle.net/wiki/Hyperpigmentation), and hyperhidrosis (http://needtobuildmuscle.net/wiki/Hyperhidrosis) may occur in these patients

Notice that pronounced lower jaw and general expansion of the skull can occur.. yes think Barry bonds.
So is this caused by the use of steroids…. Im telling you now NO, this is caused by the combination of high Androgen levels and the inclusion in large doses of GH (http://www.purchasepeptides.com/idevaffiliate/idevaffiliate.php?id=125)or localised GF.
In fact when Acromegaly is examined, often the main check made is on IGF-1 levels.. as these if too high can cause disfigurement, not just in the face but distended bellies can be seen also as the internal organs also grow.. Sadly even the heart.
The ever more present Mandibular overgrowth that leads to prognathism, maxillary widening, teeth separation and jaw malocclusion is now common place in a sport where people are supposedly seeking the body beautiful… but maybe they are none to worried about facial beauty.. I think there is an irony there somewhere. I hope that the time of small waists and aesthetic beauty will one day return, In the meantime we all need to be aware of what playing with our hormones can do in the long run… and even in the short term


Kindest regards RS

hydroweighed4.0%bf
02-26-2013, 12:48 PM
RS,
It is funny that you bring up the subject of acromegaly and its association with gh and igf. I just completed a month intense focus area on this subject. Various tissue types express igf receptors. The signs you bring up on the bodybuilder are in fact a type of secondary acquired acromegaly. igf appears to stimulate osteocyte activity and cartilogenesis so this accounts for classic visible symptoms you mentioned earlier. also the igf receptors in both skeletal and smooth muscle enable increased protein synthesis rates which manifests in organomegaly of the heart, liver, and intestines. another topic that i would feel deems mentioning is the effect that igf can have on cancer cell growth. reading through your posts it appears that you have significantly more experience with bodybuilders from young to old to pro to novice. i would be interested to know if any of the older ones that used igf or hgh have ever had any issues with cancer? and just to clarify i am not saying or suggesting that androgens or igf etc cause cancer, that is clearly not the case. what i am interested in, is the ability of igf or hgh to increase the rate of protein synthesis in altered cells that express igf receptors that end up becoming cancerous or the ability of igf or hgh to accelerate cancer cell growth. the idea being that the presence of cancer cells is normal and happens everyday in the human body but that there is possibly a potential for igf or hgh to accelerate the growth and reproduction of the cells to the extent that the immune system may not be able to halt the growth of the altered cells.

russianstar
02-26-2013, 03:54 PM
RS,
It is funny that you bring up the subject of acromegaly and its association with gh and igf. I just completed a month intense focus area on this subject. Various tissue types express igf receptors. The signs you bring up on the bodybuilder are in fact a type of secondary acquired acromegaly. igf appears to stimulate osteocyte activity and cartilogenesis so this accounts for classic visible symptoms you mentioned earlier. also the igf receptors in both skeletal and smooth muscle enable increased protein synthesis rates which manifests in organomegaly of the heart, liver, and intestines. another topic that i would feel deems mentioning is the effect that igf can have on cancer cell growth. reading through your posts it appears that you have significantly more experience with bodybuilders from young to old to pro to novice. i would be interested to know if any of the older ones that used igf or hgh have ever had any issues with cancer? and just to clarify i am not saying or suggesting that androgens or igf etc cause cancer, that is clearly not the case. what i am interested in, is the ability of igf or hgh to increase the rate of protein synthesis in altered cells that express igf receptors that end up becoming cancerous or the ability of igf or hgh to accelerate cancer cell growth. the idea being that the presence of cancer cells is normal and happens everyday in the human body but that there is possibly a potential for igf or hgh to accelerate the growth and reproduction of the cells to the extent that the immune system may not be able to halt the growth of the altered cells.

We have to be carefull not to scare monger with these discussions.
But i agree with what you posted..

Ive always though of igf as like a turbo for various mechanisms, and it puts your body into overdrive, as you get older its the last thing you want to stay young and healthy. Hence alternate fasting is becoming a huge life style choice... lowering igf seems to improve health vastly.

I fear that if somone has cancer, then igf has the potential to speed up its growth, but i have yet to speak with a bodybuilder who has had cancer and used igf... so its theoretic.

The internal signs of IGF though have been reported, for example the affects hgh can have on the cardiovascular system and muscle.. increasing pressure within the left ventricle, enlarging the heart, i put this down to elevated IGF for long periods.. jesse marunde for example, the strongman, used hgh and aas, the autopsy that wasnt revealed to the media showed his heart had basicaly burst... Perhaps from igf etc.. but he had a defect, so.. it guesstimate.

Its certainly a subject that needs to be adressed very carefully.