The effect of modafinil on counter-regulatory and cognitive responses to hypoglycaemia
Open accessAbstract
Aims/hypothesis Our hypothesis is that reducing release of the inhibitory neurotransmitter gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) with modafinil will enhance symptomatic and hormonal responses to hypoglycaemia. Methods Nine healthy men received, in random order, two 100-mg doses of modafinil or placebo, followed by an insulin clamp in which plasma glucose was either reduced stepwise to 2.4 mmol/l or was sustained at euglycaemia (four studies). Catecholamines, symptom scores and cognitive function were measured. Results Modafinil had no effect on the measured parameters during euglycaemia. During hypoglycaemia, autonomic symptom scores were significantly higher with modafinil (increase at lowest plasma glucose concentration 271.3+/-118.9 vs 211.2+/-80.4/40 min, p=0.019), and the heart rate response was increased (12,928+/-184 vs 6773+/-148 bpm/140 min, p=0.016). Deterioration in performance of two cognitive tasks was reduced: Stroop colour-word test (613+/-204 vs 2375+/-161/65 min, p=0.009) and accuracy of a simple reaction task (11.3+/-1.8 vs 9.4+/-3.7, p=0.039). Conclusions/interpretation We conclude that modafinil improves adrenergic sensitivity and some aspects of cognitive function at hypoglycaemia, possibly by reducing neuronal central GABA concentrations.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A total of 25 studies (40%) provided data to either calculate or extract the glycaemic threshold for symptom responses to hypoglycaemia.
“A total of 25 studies (40%) provided data to either calculate or extract the glycaemic threshold for symptom responses to hypoglycaemia [6, 13, 16–18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 29, 31, 33–37, 46, 51–53, 56, 57, 58, 63, 68].”
From Glycaemic thresholds for counterregulatory hormone and symptom responses to hypoglycaemia in people with and without type 1 diabetes: a systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as [29]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 40 · Cited by 31
- Authors
- Smith, D., Pernet, A., Rosenthal, J. M., Bingham, E. M., Reid, H., Macdonald, I. A., & Amiel, S. A.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Amiel, S. A.
- Venue
- Diabetologia
- Published
- 2004-10
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1704-1711
- ISSN
- 0012-186X (ISSN-L)
- 1432-0428
- OpenAlex
- W2043797759
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 1.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Diabetologia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Novo Nordisk UK Research Foundation
- King's College London
- Novo Nordisk
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatic function and diabetes
- Keywords
- modafinil, hypoglycemia, counterregulatory response, GABA, cognitive function, catecholamines, heart rate, adrenergic sensitivity, Stroop task, reaction time, insulin clamp, autonomic symptoms
- MeSH terms
- Modafinil, Adult, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Benzhydryl Compounds, Blood Glucose, Cognition, Double-Blind Method, Epinephrine, Glucagon, Heart Rate, Humans, Hypoglycemia, Male, Placebos, Reaction Time, Reference Values, Glucose Clamp Technique
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review