Acromegaly due to ectopic growth hormone (GH)-releasing hormone (GHRH) production: dynamic studies of GH and ectopic GHRH secretion

Dynamic studies of GH and GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) secretion were performed in a man with a GHRH-producing carcinoid tumor and acromegaly. Insulin hypoglycemia stimulated and metoclopramide inhibited both GH and GHRH acutely. Bromocriptine suppressed GH both acutely and chronically without altering circulating GHRH levels and also blunted the GH response to exogenous GHRH. TRH acutely stimulated GH, but not GHRH, secretion, and iv bolus doses of synthetic GHRH-(1-40) stimulated GH release acutely. Somatostatin infusion decreased both GH and GHRH concentrations and blunted the GH responses to TRH and GHRH-(1-40). We conclude that prolonged exposure of the pituitary gland to high concentrations of GHRH is associated with chronic GH hypersecretion and may be accompanied by a preserved acute GH response to exogenous GHRH; a paradoxical response of GH to TRH may be mediated at the pituitary level, consequent to prolonged pituitary exposure to GHRH; bromocriptine suppression of GH in acromegaly is due to a direct pituitary effect of the drug; and somatostatin inhibits both ectopic GHRH secretion as well as GH responsiveness to GHRH in vivo. Since GH secretory responses in patients with somatotroph adenomas are similar to those in this patient, augmented GHRH secretion may play a role in development of the "classic" form of acromegaly.     

Bromocriptine does not alter growth hormone (GH) responsiveness to GH-releasing hormone in acromegaly

GHRH (100 micrograms) and TRH (200 micrograms) were administered to 24 active acromegalic patients before and during chronic bromocriptine (Br) treatment (Br, 10-15 mg/day for 3-5 months) to evaluate the possible effects of the dopamine agonist on GH release induced by these releasing hormones. Mean daily plasma GH levels were reduced by Br treatment from 34 +/- 40 (SD) to 16 +/- 19 ng/ml (P less than 0.01). No significant changes were found when comparing the GH response to GHRH as mean area under the response curve (nanograms per min/ml above the basal) (pretreatment, 5453 +/- 7843; during Br, 7017 +/- 12763 ng/ml . min), and as mean individual peak GH values (pretreatment, 130 +/- 148; during Br, 126 +/- 187 ng/ml) before and during treatment. The percentage GH increase (pretreatment, 340 +/- 354; during Br, 617 +/- 539%) was however significantly higher during Br. Br treatment significantly reduced the GH response to TRH in terms of mean of individual peak levels (from 136 +/- 134 to 60 +/- 52 ng/ml; P less than 0.01) and area under the response curve (from 3142 +/- 3998 to 1331 +/- 1646 ng/min . ml; P less than 0.01). However, the percentage GH increase was not significantly different (pretreatment, 486 +/- 729; during Br, 1059 +/- 1862%). When the patients were divided into Br responders, i.e. mean daily GH reduction during Br of at least 50% below baseline, and nonresponders, the initial response to GHRH was significantly higher in the latter group, but was unaffected by Br treatment in either group. On the contrary, the response to TRH, statistically significant initially only in the Br responder group, was reduced by Br treatment. We suggest that cells sensitive to Br and TRH but not to GHRH (lactotroph-like) and cells sensitive to GHRH but not to Br (pure somatotrophs) may coexist in GH-secreting adenomas.     

Interaction of glucose and pyridostigmine on the secretion of growth hormone (GH) induced by GH-releasing hormone (GHRH)

In order to investigate the mechanisms by which hyperglycaemia induces an inhibition of GHRH-induced GH release, we gave the following treatments to seven normal men: a) GHRH 100 micrograms iv; b) pyridostigmine (PD) 120 mg po 60 min before GHRH; c) glucose 250 mg/kg iv as a bolus (10 min before GHRH) plus 10 mg/kg/min until the end of the test; d) glucose pyridostigmine and GHRH as above. Glucose significantly reduced GHRH-stimulated GH levels, whereas PD significantly enhanced them. When PD and glucose were given together, the effect on GHRH-stimulated GH secretion was not different from the algebraic sum of the single effects of the two substances. Thus glucose seems to be able to exert its inhibition, at least partially, also when pyridostigmine is coadministered.     

Calcitonin suppresses growth hormone (GH) response to growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) in man

Calcitonin (CT) receptors have been found in the hypothalamus, suggesting a neuroendocrine role for this peptide. We have recently shown that, in the rat, central administration of salmon calcitonin (sCT) suppresses basal and GHRH-stimulated GH secretion. To further investigate how sCT alters GH secretion, we studied the effects of sCT (100U MRC, im) or placebo on basal and GHRH (50 micrograms, iv)-stimulated GH secretion in 6 normal men. GHRH was administered 1 h after sCT injection. Basal GH levels were not altered by sCT administration. However, GH response to GHRH was markedly suppressed by sCT (area under the curve - sCT: 574.6 +/- 69.7 vs placebo: 1057.2 +/- 284.8 micrograms. min/L; p less than 0.02). Cortisol levels were higher in sCT-treated subjects compared to controls, from 45 to 105 min after sCT injection (p less than 0.05). However, no correlation was found between GH response to GHRH and cortisol levels. No changes in glucose, calcium and PTH levels were seen. These results demonstrate that sCT inhibits GHRH-induced GH secretion in man by a mechanism apparently independent of changes in peripheral cortisol, glucose, calcium and PTH levels.     

The GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) test in acromegaly before and after adenomectomy

The GHRH test may represent a new tool in the study of GH dynamics in acromegaly. GH responsiveness to GHRH 1-40 (50 micrograms iv) has been studied in 21 acromegalic patients. Nineteen out of 21 had active disease. Five patients were also studied 1-12 months after neurosurgery. Two apparently cured acromegalics were studied 1-2 yr after surgery. GH secretion has been evaluated in all patients by means of TRH, bromocriptine and insulin hypoglycemia tests, too. GH response to GHRH has also been performed in 14 normal subjects. In acromegaly, GH responses after GHRH (p less than 0.01 vs placebo) were variable. The GH peak ranged from 8 to 445 ng/ml in patients with active disease. Maximum GH increase after GHRH (calculated as peak/basal value ratio) was significantly reduced in acromegaly (2.9 +/- 0.5 ng/ml; mean +/- SE) in comparison to controls (34.1 +/- 10.9 ng/ml; p less than 0.01). No significant differences in GH pattern after GHRH were found between untreated and previously treated patients with active disease. A significant correlation was found between GH basal levels and GH incremental area (p less than 0.05) and between GH basal and peak levels (p less than 0.01) after GHRH. A significant increase in PRL secretion was observed in acromegalic patients after GHRH (p less than 0.01 vs placebo). No discernable variation was found in the other pituitary hormones pattern after the peptide administration. A positive correlation was observed between GH increase after GHRH and insulin hypoglycemia (p less than 0.01).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Studies on the response of growth hormone (GH) secretion to GH-releasing hormone, thyrotropin-releasing hormone, gonadotropin-releasing hormone, and somatostatin in acromegaly

The plasma GH response to GH-releasing hormone (GHRH), TRH, or GnRH administration was examined in 25 acromegalic patients. Plasma GH levels increased in 21 patients after GHRH, in 19 after TRH, and in 4 after GnRH. The four GHRH nonresponders had had acromegaly longer than had the GHRH responders. No specific combination of GH responsiveness to these 3 releasing hormones was found among the patients. Infusion of 1 mg GHRH for 150 min gradually increased plasma GH levels, with some fluctuations, from the beginning to the end of infusion in normal subjects and in 7 patients who were GHRH responders, but a bolus injection of 100 micrograms GHRH at the end of the infusion did not further elevate plasma GH levels. These results suggest that desensitization to GHRH occurred in the normal subjects and acromegalic patients. However, in 5 acromegalic patients who responded to both GHRH and TRH, a bolus injection of 500 micrograms TRH given at the end of the 150-min infusion of 1 mg GHRH evoked a further plasma GH rise. In 5 normal subjects and 2 patients who were responders to GHRH but not TRH, a bolus injection of 500 micrograms TRH did not cause plasma GH elevation at the end of 150-min infusion of 1 mg GHRH. These results imply that TRH and GnRH stimulate GH secretion from the adenoma cells in vivo through receptors different from those for GHRH. In vitro studies using cultured pituitary adenoma cells from 2 patients revealed that the responses of GH secretion to GHRH were similar to those in vivo. These data, therefore, suggest that the responsiveness of GH secretion to stimuli is determined by the specificity of the receptors on adenoma cells. The action of somatostatin-28 was more potent than that of somatostatin-14 in the suppression of GH secretion from adenoma cells.     

Growth hormone (GH) and prolactin responses to repetitive administration of GH-releasing hormone in acromegaly

We investigated the pattern of GH secretion in response to repetitive GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) administration in patients with active acromegaly and in normal subjects. Twelve acromegalic patients (nine women and 3 men; aged 21-76 yr) were studied. Eight had never been treated, whereas four had undergone neurosurgery but still had active disease. All patients and eight normal subjects received three doses of 50 micrograms GHRH, iv, at 2-h intervals. Seven patients were retested 6-8 weeks after transsphenoidal removal of a pituitary adenoma. There was a marked serum GH rise in acromegalic patients and normal subjects after the first GHRH dose [area under the curve, 2070 +/- 532 (+/- SE) vs. 1558 +/- 612 ng/min X ml, respectively; P = NS]. Successive GHRH doses stimulated GH release only in acromegalic patients (second dose, 1123 +/- 421 ng/min X ml; third dose, 2293 +/- 1049 ng/min X ml). In normal subjects, the GH response to the second and third GHRH doses was blunted (second dose, 86 +/- 32 ng/min X ml; third dose, 210 +/- 63 ng/min X ml; P less than 0.01). PRL secretion did not change in normal subjects, whereas 6 of 12 acromegalic patients had PRL release after each GHRH dose (PRL responders to GHRH). Transsphenoidal surgery led to normalization (less than 5 ng/ml) of the preoperatively elevated GH levels in all but 2 patients, who, however, had reduction of somatomedin-C levels. The amount of GH released in the postoperative test was significantly lower than that released preoperatively (first dose, 722 +/- 209 vs. 2945 +/- 743 ng/min X ml; second dose, 358 +/- 117 vs. 1737 +/- 633 ng/min X ml; third dose, 320 +/- 144 vs. 1776 +/- 676 ng/min X ml, respectively; P less than 0.05 in all instances). Thus, patients with active acromegaly, but not normal subjects, respond to repetitive GHRH administration at 2-h intervals with an increase in GH levels. This increase may be due to a larger releasable GH pool and/or faster GH turnover in the adenomatous cell.     

Effects of theophylline infusion on the growth hormone (GH) and prolactin response to GH-releasing hormone administration in acromegaly

Since theophylline has been shown to blunt the GH response to growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) in normal subjects, we investigated whether the same effect of theophylline administration could be reproduced in patients with active acromegaly. Ten acromegalic patients received on two different days 100 micrograms GHRH iv alone and the same GHRH dose during a constant infusion of theophylline (3.56 mg/min), beginning 2 h before GHRH administration. In the whole group theophylline did not affect basal GH secretion significantly (from a mean of 44.6 +/- 14.4 at 0 min to 41.8 +/- 13.5 ng/ml at 120 min). However, the amount of GH released after GHRH stimulation was lower when theophylline was concomitantly infused (7525 +/- 3709 ng min/ml vs. 12038 +/- 6337 ng min/ml; p less than 0.05). The inhibitory effect of theophylline was not homogeneous, since either marked or minimal reductions of the GHRH-stimulated GH secretion occurred. Serum PRL levels increased after GHRH administration in 6 patients and theophylline infusion had no influence upon this response. Peak GHRH levels were not different in both studies (14.9 +/- 1.7 and 17.1 +/- 4.0 ng/ml, respectively). Free fatty acid levels rose progressively during theophylline administration (from 0.66 +/- 0.10 at 0 min to 1.04 +/- 0.10 mEq/l at 240 min) and were significantly higher than after GHRH stimulation alone from 180 min up to the end of the test. Our results demonstrate that in active acromegaly theophylline blunts the GH response to GHRH, though this effect is not uniformly seen in all patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Partial reversibility of growth hormone (GH) deficiency in the GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) knockout mouse by postnatal treatment with a GHRH analog

The proliferation of pituitary somatotroph cells and the synthesis and secretion of GH require the hypothalamic peptide GH-releasing hormone (GHRH). Accordingly, we have shown that mice with targeted disruption [knockout (KO)] of the GHRH gene (GHRHKO) have isolated GH deficiency (GHD) and anterior pituitary hypoplasia. The weight of GRHRKO mice is about 60% that of normal mice by 12 wk of age. The phenotype is strikingly similar to that observed in the mouse with mutated GHRH receptor (little). It is not known whether exposure to endogenous GHRH during intrauterine growth is necessary for postnatal GH secretion, and whether GHD due to congenital lack of GHRH activity would be reversible by treatment with GHRH during the postnatal period. To answer this question, we treated GHRHKO mice with a long-acting superactive GHRH analog (JI-38) at two ages: from wk 2-6 (2 microg, twice a day) and from wk 12-16 (4 microg, twice a day). Normal littermates served as controls. At both ages JI-38 caused growth acceleration, increase in size of the pituitary gland, increase in pituitary GH mRNA and GH protein levels and serum GH, and significant increase in liver IGF-I mRNA, although none of these parameters was fully normalized. Our findings demonstrate that GHD and pituitary hypoplasia in GHRHKO mice may be partially reversed by long-term treatment with a GHRH analog, and that somatotroph cells maintain responsiveness to GHRH even if this factor is absent during intrauterine development.     

Sex differences in growth hormone (GH) secretion by rats administered GH-releasing hexapeptide

The purpose of this study was to compare GH secretion after the administration of GH-releasing hexapeptide (GHRP-6) in conscious male and female rats. Plasma GH was significantly elevated in female rats (six of six) compared to male rats (three of six) 15 min after administration of a single sc injection of GHRP-6 (0.5 mg/kg). In male rats, GHRP-6 administration was associated with suppression of episodic GH secretion and desensitization to a second injection administered 6 h later, whereas in female rats, GH secretion occurred after both GHRP-6 injections. After 14 consecutive days of administering GHRP-6 twice per day, mean plasma GH concentrations in males decreased from 110 +/- 91 to 2.8 +/- 0.6 ng/ml (P less than 0.05) and in females increased from 170 +/- 53 ng/ml to 361 +/- 81 ng/ml (P less than 0.05). Desensitization to GHRP-6 in conscious male rats was not observed in pentobarbital-anesthetized male rats, suggesting that GHRP-6 administration enhanced somatostatin release in the conscious state. After 14 consecutive days of GHRP-6 administration, the mean pituitary GH concentration in female rats was significantly lower than that in male rats (5.1 +/- 0.2 vs. 12.9 +/- 1.2 micrograms/mg, respectively). Lower pituitary GH concentrations in females correlated with higher GH secretion after GHRP-6 administration. Desensitization to GHRP-6 in male rats is attributed to neurohumoral factors producing their unusual pattern of episodic GH secretion, and the response is probably not typical of other species.     

Impaired growth hormone (GH) response to GH-releasing hormone in thalassemia major

The response of GH to acute administration of GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) was evaluated in 19 patients with thalassemia major and 8 normal children. In 13 of the 19 patients, GHRH induced a definite increase (greater than 5 ng/ml) in plasma GH levels, with peaks occurring 5-45 min postinjection. In 6 patients there was little or no GH rise after GHRH treatment. Overall, the mean GH response to GHRH of patients with thalassemia was lower than that of normal children. These data indicate that in thalassemia major, in addition to the described defect at the hepatic GH receptor or postreceptor level which impedes generation of somatomedins, there may be a marked impairment in somatotroph function. In one patient in whom the GH response to GHRH was superimposable on that of normal subjects, there was a blunted GH response to insulin hypoglycemia. This finding indicates that functional damage in hypothalamic structures for GH control can also occur in thalassemic patients.     

Ghrelin and growth hormone (GH) secretagogues potentiate GH-releasing hormone (GHRH)-induced cyclic adenosine 3',5'-monophosphate production in cells expressing transfected GHRH and GH secretagogue receptors

GHRH stimulates GH secretion from somatotroph cells of the anterior pituitary via a pathway that involves GHRH receptor activation of adenylyl cyclase and increased cAMP production. The actions of GHRH to release GH can be augmented by the synthetic GH secretagogues (GHS), which bind to a distinct G protein-coupled receptor to activate phospholipase C and increase production of the second messengers calcium and diacylglycerol. The stomach peptide ghrelin represents an endogenous ligand for the GHS receptor, which does not activate the cAMP signaling pathway. This study investigates the effects of GHS and ghrelin on GHRH-induced cAMP production in a homogenous population of cells expressing the cloned GHRH and GHS receptors. Each epitope-tagged receptor was shown to be appropriately expressed and to functionally couple to its respective second messenger pathway in this heterologous cell system. Although activation of the GHS receptor alone had no effect on cAMP production, coactivation of the GHS and GHRH receptors produced a cAMP response approximately twice that observed after activation of the GHRH receptor alone. This potentiated response is dose dependent with respect to both GHRH and GHS, is dependent on the expression of both receptors, and was observed with a variety of peptide and nonpeptide GHS compounds as well as with ghrelin-(1-5). Pharmacological inhibition of signaling molecules associated with GHS receptor activation, including G protein betagamma-subunits, phospholipase C, and protein kinase C, had no effect on GHS potentiation of GHRH-induced cAMP production. Importantly, the potentiation appears to be selective for the GHRH receptor. Treatment of cells with the pharmacological agent forskolin elevated cAMP levels, but these levels were not further increased by GHS receptor activation. Similarly, activation of two receptors homologous to the GHRH receptor, the vasoactive intestinal peptide and secretin receptors, increased cAMP levels, but these levels were not further increased by GHS receptor activation. Based on these findings, we speculate that direct interactions between the GHRH and GHS receptors may explain the observed effects on signal transduction.     

Impaired growth hormone (GH) response to pyridostigmine in type 1 diabetic patients with exaggerated GH-releasing hormone-stimulated GH secretion

In the present study we investigated the effects of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor pyridostigmine (PD), which is hypothesized to decrease hypothalamic somatostatin tone, alone and in association with GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) on GH secretion in 18 type 1 diabetic patients and 12 normal subjects using a randomized double blind placebo-controlled protocol. All subjects received either 120 mg oral PD or placebo 60 min before iv injection of either human GHRH-(1-29) NH2 (100 micrograms) or sterile water (2 mL). In normal subjects both PD alone and GHRH alone caused a significant increase in GH. PD and GHRH acted in a synergistic fashion when combined. In diabetic patients the GH response to GHRH was variable. To segregate the responses, the ratio between the GH increase after GHRH plus PD and after GHRH alone was calculated for each subject. In 10 diabetic patients (group A) the ratio was lower than 2 SD (P less than 0.05) from the mean response of normal subjects. These patients showed an exaggerated GH increase after GHRH and a lower GH increase after PD with respect to normal subjects. Eight diabetic patients (group B) showed a ratio similar to that in normal subjects and similar GH responses to the stimuli. No significant differences were found between groups A and B with respect to age, body mass index, and blood glucose levels. Duration of diabetes was longer and basal GH levels were higher in group A. Hemoglobin-A1c was higher in group A, but of only borderline statistical significance (P = 0.052). Our data demonstrate that in diabetic patients with exaggerated GH responses to GHRH an increase in cholinergic tone does not affect GH secretion. These data suggest that in some type 1 diabetic patients an altered somatostatinergic control of GH secretion may contribute to their abnormal GH response to GHRH.     

Growth hormone (GH) responses to the hexapeptide GH-releasing peptide and GH-releasing hormone (GHRH) in the cynomolgus macaque: evidence for non-GHRH-mediated responses.

GH-releasing peptide (GHRP; His-D-Trp-Ala-Trp-D-Phe-Lys-NH2), a hexapeptide derived from enkephalin, has been shown to have GH-releasing activity in man and several animal species. To characterize the GHRP dose-response curve and compare it with that of GH-releasing hormone [GHRH-(1-44)NH2], six unanesthetized young adult cynomolgus macaques were tested with a range of iv doses of GHRP or GHRH in random order. Animals were fitted with vests and tethers. Blood samples were obtained before and at 15-min intervals after the administration of drugs. Doses ranged from 0.03-3 mg/kg for GHRP and from 1-30 micrograms/kg for GHRH. The dose-response curves for the two peptides were not parallel. GHRP had lower potency, but evoked a much higher peak GH response than GHRH (greater than 55 vs. 12 micrograms/L). Because one of the proposed mechanisms of action of GHRP is the inhibition of somatostatin (SS), we tested the effects of propranolol, which inhibits SS, on the GH responses to GHRH and GHRP. Propranolol was given at a dose of 14 micrograms/kg, iv, 10 min before the injection of saline, GHRH (10 micrograms/kg), or GHRP (1 mg/kg). GH responses to propranolol alone did not differ from those to placebo (peak, 6 +/- 2 vs. 8 +/- 2 micrograms/L). However, propranolol pretreatment doubled the GH responses to both GHRH and GHRP compared with those to GHRH or GHRP alone 28 +/- 5 micrograms/L vs. 14 +/- 5 (P less than 0.05) and 54 +/- 2 vs. 25 +/- 6 micrograms/L (P less than 0.001), respectively]. These results show that GHRP causes a potent dose-dependent release of GH in this primate species. Since GHRP can produce a greater maximal GH response than GHRH, mechanisms other than release of endogenous GHRH must be involved.     

Failure to respond to growth hormone releasing hormone (GHRH) in acromegaly due to a GHRH secreting pancreatic tumor: dynamics of multiple endocrine testing

Growth hormone releasing hormone (GHRH) has recently been isolated and sequenced from pancreatic tumors secreting GHRH. Patients with untreated acromegaly due to a pituitary tumor respond to exogenous administration of GHRH with a further rise of their elevated basal growth hormone (GH) levels. For the first time, we report the effects of exogenously administered synthetic GHRH in a patient with acromegaly due to a GHRH secreting pancreatic tumor. The diagnosis was established by high peripheral IR-GHRH levels (1100 pg/ml) and an arterio- venous tumor gradient of IR-GHRH. In this patient GH failed to respond to 1 microgram/kg of exogenous GHRH with the pancreatic tumor in situ; however, further increase of serum GH levels occurred after TRH administration, hypoglycemia and oral glucose administration. After removal of the tumor, serum GH levels decreased and a normal response to GHRH and TRH were demonstrated. The extract of the tumor contained 1.7 micrograms IR-GHRH per g wet tissue. Thus, lack of response to exogenous GHRH in untreated acromegaly may indicate the presence of an ectopic GHRH producing tumor.     

Suppression of the growth hormone (GH) response to clonidine and GH-releasing hormone by exogenous GH

GH release in response to clonidine and human GH-releasing hormone-(1-44) (hGHRH-44) was assessed in 11 boys (aged 7-14 yr) with short stature, who had normal GH secretion. The response to these 2 provocative stimuli was repeated after, respectively, 2 and 3 days of treatment with human GH (0.1 U/kg, im). Exogenous GH significantly blunted the response to both clonidine [the mean 2-h integrated serum GH concentration falling from 1050 +/- 350 (+/- SEM) to 749 +/- 297 ng/ml X min; P = 0.03] and hGHRH-44, the 2-h integrated GH concentration falling from 1553 +/- 358 to 547 +/- 202 ng/ml X min; (P = 0.03). Plasma insulin-like growth factor (IGF-II) concentrations did not change after GH administration. In contrast, plasma IGF-I (somatomedin-C) concentrations increased from 97 +/- 16 ng/ml before administration of GH to 142 +/- 32 ng/ml (P = 0.05) after two days and 149 +/- 23 ng/ml (P less than 0.01) after the third treatment day. However, no correlation was found between the changes in response to clonidine or hGHRH-44 and changes in circulating levels of IGF-I. Our data confirm the existence of GH-dependent feedback inhibition of GH release during childhood and suggest that this inhibition operates, at least in part, at the level of the pituitary. While participation of the IGFs/somatomedins in this feedback loop cannot be excluded, the inhibitory effects of exogenous GH do not depend directly on circulating plasma IGF-I or IGF-II levels.     

Growth hormone (GH) response to GH-releasing hormone in depression

To explore the GHRH-GH-somatomedin axis integrity in major depressive disorder, 11 drug-free patients and normal subjects matched for age, sex, ovarian status, and body weight received 1 microgram/kg synthetic human GHRH-44 amide as an iv bolus dose. Compared to the normal subjects, the depressed patients had reduced mean basal serum GH levels [2.2 +/- 0.5 (+/- SE) vs. 1.1 +/- 0.2 ng/mL (micrograms/L); P less than 0.05] and a significant attenuation of the net GH response to GHRH [1346 +/- 499 vs. 217 +/- 46 ng.min/mL (micrograms.min/L); P less than 0.01]. The blunted GH responses occurred in the face of significantly increased plasma somatomedin C (Sm-C) levels [1.1 +/- 0.2 vs. 0.6 +/- 0.1 U/mL; P less than 0.05]. The magnitude of GH responses to GHRH did not differ between men and women and was not significantly correlated with age, body weight, baseline serum GH levels, or plasma Sm-C levels in either individual groups or both groups combined. The increased plasma Sm-C levels in the depressed patients could have resulted from diurnal hypersecretion of GH, and the diminished GH responses to GHRH may reflect normal Sm-C-mediated feedback at the level of the pituitary. The presumed GH hypersecretion may be due to decreased hypothalamic somatostatin release and/or hyperactivity of GHRH-containing neurons. Thus, the pathological process resulting in abnormal GH secretory patterns associated with depression may occur primarily at a suprapituitary site.     

Acute growth hormone (GH) response to GH-releasing hexapeptide in humans is independent of endogenous GH-releasing hormone.

The synthetic GH-releasing hexapeptide (GHRP: His-DTrp-Ala-Trp-DPhe-Lys-NH2) releases GH in man by an undetermined mechanism. To investigate whether acute GH response to GHRP is mediated by endogenous GHRH, we examined the effect of GHRP on GH release during pituitary desensitization to GHRH induced by short-term GHRH infusion. In five healthy men on six occasions, we infused saline (sal) or 1 microgram/kg.h GHRH-44 for 6 h. After 4 h, a bolus of sal, GHRH-44 1 microgram/kg body weight, or GHRP 1 microgram/kg body weight was given iv. GH concentration, measured by RIA, was analyzed by mean area under the curve (AUC) of GH released over the 2 h immediately after bolus injection. Infusion of GHRH had a biphasic effect on GH release; plasma GH increased to 12.7 +/- 3.3 micrograms/L within the first hour, with subsequent decrease to 2.9 +/- 0.3 micrograms/L during the last 2 h of infusion. GH AUC (hours 4-6 of infusion) microgram/L.2 h [table: see text] GH response to bolus GHRH was abolished by GHRH infusion, whereas GH response to GHRP persisted under the same conditions. Thus, we conclude that acute GH response to GHRP in humans is not mediated by endogenous GHRH.